The cost of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Italy

A Smartphone-Based Decision Support Tool for Predicting Patients at Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Retrospective Study on App Development Using Decision Tree Induction

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are the two most frightful and unpleasant side effects of chemotherapy. CINV is accountable for poor treatment outcomes, treatment failure, or even death. It can affect patients' overall quality of life, leading to many social, economic, and clinical consequences.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the performances of different data mining models for predicting the risk of CINV among the patients and developed a smartphone app for clinical decision support to recommend the risk of CINV at the point of care.

METHODS

Data were collected by retrospective record review from the electronic medical records used at the University of Missouri Ellis Fischel Cancer Center. Patients who received chemotherapy and standard antiemetics at the oncology outpatient service from June 1, 2010, to July 31, 2012, were included in the study. There were six independent data sets of patients based on emetogenicity (low, moderate, and high) and two phases of CINV (acute and delayed). A total of 14 risk factors of CINV were chosen for data mining. For our study, we used five popular data mining algorithms: (1) naive Bayes algorithm, (2) logistic regression classifier, (3) neural network, (4) support vector machine (using sequential minimal optimization), and (5) decision tree. Performance measures, such as accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity with 10-fold cross-validation, were used for model comparisons. A smartphone app called CINV Risk Prediction Application was developed using the ResearchKit in iOS utilizing the decision tree algorithm, which conforms to the criteria of explainable, usable, and actionable artificial intelligence. The app was created using both the bulk questionnaire approach and the adaptive approach.

RESULTS

The decision tree performed well in both phases of high emetogenic chemotherapies, with a significant margin compared to the other algorithms. The accuracy measure for the six patient groups ranged from 79.3% to 94.8%. The app was developed using the results from the decision tree because of its consistent performance and simple, explainable nature. The bulk questionnaire approach asks 14 questions in the smartphone app, while the adaptive approach can determine questions based on the previous questions' answers. The adaptive approach saves time and can be beneficial when used at the point of care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study solved a real clinical problem, and the solution can be used for personalized and precise evidence-based CINV management, leading to a better life quality for patients and reduced health care costs.

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) with GI Cancer Chemotherapy: Do We Need CINV Risk Score Over and Above Antiemetic Guidelines in Prescribing Antiemetic Regime?

Background  Various predictive models have been developed which incorporates patient risk factors into the selection of optimal antiemetic therapy, one of which is chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) risk scoring system developed by Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). Patients and Methods  Consecutive patients with gastrointestinal malignancy who had not received previous chemotherapy were eligible for enrollment in the study if they were scheduled to receive at least one cycle of chemotherapy. The CINV risk assessment tool was used to collect the study data and to assess CINV risk score. Results  Ninety-eight patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were included in this study, out of which 57% were males, median age was 48 years (range: 28-77). Colorectal cancer (32.7%) was the most common diagnosis followed by gastric cancer (27.6%). Gemcitabine/cisplatin and CAPOX regimen were the most common regimen being administered in 19.4% each. As per MASCC guidelines, 19.4% patients received highly emetogenic chemotherapy, 69.4% moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, while 11.2% received regimen with low emetogenicity. CINV risk module characterized 52% patients to have high risk for CINV, while 48% to have low risk of CINV, thus, 52% had the discrepancy in risk assigned by two methods, and this was statistically significant ( p = 0.025). In subgroup analysis, although patient cohort with acute nausea had no statistically significant discrepancy ( p = 0.123), but statistically significant discrepancy was found in patient cohort with delayed nausea ( p = 0.001), acute ( p = 0.038), and delayed ( p < 0.001) vomiting. Conclusion  A significant percentage of patients who receive chemotherapy continue to experience nausea and vomiting despite receiving antiemetic treatment as per standard guidelines. The study generates a hypothesis for future large randomized studies looking at change in antiemetic prophylaxis based on CINV risk tool, leading to improvement in complete response rates of acute and delayed CINV.

A dynamic prediction engine to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Cancer remains the second major cause of death in the United States over the last decade. Chemotherapy is a core component of nearly every cancer treatment plan. Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) are the two most dreadful and unpleasant side-effects of chemotherapy for cancer patients. Several patient-specific factors affect the risk of CINV. However, none of the guidelines consider those factors. Not all of the patients have the similar emetic risk of CINV. Despite the improvements in CINV management, as many as two-thirds of chemotherapy patients still experience some degree of CINV. As a result, physicians use their personal experiences for CINV treatment, which leads to inconsistent managements of CINV.

OBJECTIVE

The overall objective of this study is to improve the prevention of CINV using precise, personalized and evidence-based antiemetic treatment before chemotherapy. In CINV prediction, one of the interesting factors is that CINV has two distinct and complex pathophysiologic phases: acute and delayed. In addition, the risk factors and their associations are different for different emetogenic chemotherapies (e.g., low, moderate, and high). There are six contexts considering the combination of phases and emetogenicity levels. This will require the creation of six different models. Instead, our objective was to describe a single framework named "prediction engine" that can perform prediction query without losing the sensitivity to each context. The prediction engine discovers how the patient-related variables and the emetogenecity of chemotherapy are associated with the risk of CINV for each phase.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study. The data were collected by retrospective record review from the electronic medical record system used at the University of Missouri Ellis Fischel Cancer Center. An association rule-based dynamic and context-sensitive Prediction Engine has been developed. Physicians receive feedback about CINV risks of patients from the CINV decision support system based on patient-specific factors.

RESULTS

The prediction performance of the system outperformed many popular prediction methods and all the results of CINV risk prediction published in the literature. Best prediction performance was achieved using the rule-ranking approach. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 87.85 %, 87.54 %, and 88.2 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The system used the patient-specific risk factors for making personalized treatment recommendations for CINV. It solved a real clinical problem that will shorten the gap between clinical practices and evidence-based guidelines for CINV management leading to the practice of personalized and precise treatment recommendation, better life quality of patient, and reduced healthcare cost. The approach presented in this article can be applied to any other clinical predictions.

Budget impact of netupitant/palonosetron for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Background: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are among the most common and debilitating side-effects patients experience during chemotherapy, and are associated with considerable acute care use and healthcare cost. It is estimated that 70-80% of CINV could be prevented through appropriate use of CINV prophylaxis; however, suboptimal CINV compliance and control remains an issue in clinical practice. Netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) is a fixed combination of serotonin-3 (5-HT₃) and neurokinin-1 (NK₁) receptor antagonists (RAs), respectively, indicated for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Phase 3 clinical trials showed a significantly higher complete response rate in both acute and delayed CINV in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving NEPA compared to patients receiving palonosetron. Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the budgetary impact of adding NEPA to a US payer or practice formulary for CINV prophylaxis. Methods: A model was developed to estimate the impact of adding NEPA to the formulary of a hypothetical US payer with 1.15 million members, including 150,000 (13%) Medicare beneficiaries. The model compared the annual total costs of CINV-related events and CINV prophylaxis in two scenarios: base year (no NEPA) and comparator year (10% and 5% NEPA usage in HEC and MEC patients, respectively). A univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the effect of variability in model parameters on the budget impact. Results: A total of 2,021 patients were eligible to receive CINV prophylaxis. With NEPA, CINV prophylaxis costs increased by 0.7% ($3,493,630 vs $3,518,760) while medical costs associated with CINV events decreased by 3.9% ($15,118,639 vs $14,532,442), resulting in a net cost saving of $561,067 (3.0%) for the health plan ($18,612,269 vs $18,051,202), or $0.04 per member per month. This was equivalent to saving $5,011 per patient moved to NEPA. Among all 5-HT₃ RA + NK₁ RA regimens, NEPA was associated with the lowest CINV-related costs, leading to the lowest total cost of care. Conclusions: Adding NEPA to a payer or practice formulary results in a net decrease in the total budget due to a substantial reduction in CINV event-related resource utilization and medical costs, and an increase in pharmacy costs <1%, saving over $5,000 per patient.

Hydration requirements in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy

AIM

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting diminishes quality of life and increases healthcare resource use. This retrospective medical records analysis evaluated hydration requirements with emetogenic chemotherapy.

PATIENTS & METHODS

Cancer patients received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), and antiemetics palonosetron or granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (GERSC), neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Unscheduled hydration event rates were determined.

RESULTS

For 186 patients (92 palonosetron, 94 GERSC) overall, mean hydration rate was significantly higher with palonosetron (0.6 vs 0.2; p = 0.0005). Proportion of patients with ≥1 hydration event was significantly higher with palonosetron overall (54 vs 33%; p = 0.0033) and in cycles 2-4 and the HEC subgroup.

CONCLUSION

GERSC within a three-drug antiemetic regimen may reduce unscheduled hydration requirements with MEC or HEC.

NEPA, a new fixed combination of netupitant and palonosetron, is a cost-effective intervention for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the UK

Background

The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NEPA, an oral fixed combination netupitant (NETU, 300 mg) and palonosetron (PA, 0.5 mg) compared with aprepitant and palonosetron (APPA) or palonosetron (PA) alone, to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients undergoing treatment with highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC) in the UK.

Scope

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were undertaken to compare NEPA with currently recommended anti-emetics. Relative effectiveness was estimated over the acute (day 1) and overall treatment (days 1–5) phases, taking complete response (CR, no emesis and no rescue medication) and complete protection (CP, CR and no more than mild nausea [VAS scale <25 mm]) as primary efficacy outcomes. A three-health-state Markov cohort model, including CP, CR and incomplete response (no CR) for HEC and MEC, was constructed. A five-day time horizon and UK NHS perspective were adopted. Transition probabilities were obtained by combining the response rates of CR and CP from NEPA trials and odds ratios from the meta-analysis. Utilities of 0.90, 0.70 and 0.24 were defined for CP, CR and incomplete response, respectively. Costs included medications and management of CINV-related events and were obtained from the British National Formulary and NHS Reference Costs. The expected budgetary impact of NEPA was also evaluated.

Findings

In HEC patients, the NEPA strategy was more effective than APPA (quality-adjusted life days [QALDs] of 4.263 versus 4.053; incremental emesis-free and CINV-free days of +0.354 and +0.237, respectively) and was less costly (£80 versus £124), resulting in NEPA being the dominant strategy. In MEC patients, NEPA was cost effective, cumulating in an estimated 0.182 extra QALDs at an incremental cost of £6.65 compared with PA.

Conclusion

Despite study limitations (study setting, time horizon, utility measure), the results suggest NEPA is cost effective for preventing CINV associated with HEC and MEC in the UK.

Economic evaluation of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in combination with dexamethasone for the prevention of 'overall' nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Chinese adult patients

Background Two pivotal Phase III trials compared the efficacy of palonosetron, ondansetron and granisetron, combined with dexamethasone, for the prevention of nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy. However, an economic evaluation of these three regimens in the real-world setting of Chinese adult patients has not been determined. Objectives To estimate, from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, which of these frequently used strategies consisting of 0.25 mg palonosetron (0.25P), 16 mg ondansetron (Onda), and 3 mg granisetron (Gran), is the most cost-effective option in patients following highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Methods A Markov decision-analytic model was developed. The health and economic outcomes of the three strategies; 0.25P, Onda, and Gran were investigated. The clinical and utility data were taken from published studies. The cost data were calculated according to current local Chinese practices. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the impact of uncertainty regarding the results. Results The base-case analysis showed that the 0.25P strategy yielded maximum health benefits compared with the other two strategies. However, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the Gran strategy was the most cost-effective approach when the willingness-to-pay threshold was not more than US$22,515/quality-adjusted life year. Moreover, palonosetron is not cost-effective in preventing 'overall' nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Chinese patients. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that, compared with palonosetron and ondansetron, 3 mg granisetron may be a cost-effective treatment option in the current Chinese healthcare setting.

The economic burden of toxicities associated with cancer treatment: review of the literature and analysis of nausea and vomiting, diarrhoea, oral mucositis and fatigue

Side effects or toxicities are frequent, undesirable companions of almost all forms of non-surgical cancer therapy. It is unusual for patients to complete treatment with radiation or chemotherapy without experiencing at least one form of therapy-associated tissue injury or systemic side effect. Often, toxicities do not occur as solitary events; rather, they result in clusters of symptoms that share a common biological aetiology. Like any disease, cancer treatment-related toxicities (CTRTs) vary in their severity. But, in contrast to most diseases in which incidence is described as being present or absent, the current approach to CTRT typically limits reporting to severe cases only. Not only does this dilute the frequency with which CTRTs occur, but it also undermines our ability to determine the full burden of their impact and to accurately assess the cost effectiveness of potential toxicity interventions. In this article, we report the results of a directed literature review for the years 2000-2012, in which we studied and compared three tissue-based toxicities (nausea and vomiting, diarrhoea, and oral mucositis) and one systemic toxicity (fatigue). Our results confirm the heavy burden of resource use and cost associated with CTRTs. The inclusion of fatigue in our analysis provided an opportunity to compare and contrast a toxicity in which there are both acute and chronic consequences. Our findings also demonstrate a number of challenges to, and opportunities for, future study. Among the most obvious are the lack of provider consistency in diagnosis and grading, especially when there is no global agreement on severity scales. Compounding this inconsistency is the disconnect between healthcare providers and patients that exists when describing toxicity severity and impact. In many cases, cancer can be thought of as a chronic disease that requires prolonged but episodic treatment once the acute disease is eradicated. This change reflects increasing treatment successes, but it also implies that the burden of CTRTs will be expanded and prolonged. Creation of hierarchical attribution of costs in the presence of simultaneous CTRTs, accurate coding, and consistent tracking tools for toxicities will be imperative for effective appraisal of the costs associated with cancer treatment regimen toxicities.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and the role of neurokinin 1 inhibitors: from guidelines to clinical practice in solid tumors

A significant proportion of cancer patients experience nausea or vomiting during the course of their disease, either because of the cancer itself or because of the treatment received. Highly or moderately emetogenic drugs are part of the standard chemotherapy regimens frequently used in patients with lung cancer, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and several other common solid tumors. In this review, we describe the impact of nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy, and the main progress achieved in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with the introduction of neurokinin 1 inhibitors. The adherence to existing guidelines is particularly important to avoid suboptimal prophylaxis and maximize patients' outcome. This review is focused on lung, breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer, which are among the solid tumors characterized by a numeric and clinical relevance of the chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting issue because of the wide use of highly and/or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens.

An outpatient Urgent Care Bay within a pediatric cancer and hematology center

Time-sensitive medical care is essential for pediatric patients undergoing treatment for a hematologic or oncologic condition. Such patients commonly experience acute symptoms related to routine childhood illness and/or their underlying disease or therapy. An Urgent Care Bay (UCB) staffed by a designated nurse and medical provider was established within Texas Children's Cancer Center Outpatient Clinic to provide time-sensitive, same-day diagnostic and therapeutic medical care during clinic hours for patients with acute, non-life-threatening symptoms. The number of patients seen in UCB, chief complaint, underlying diagnosis, and disposition was reviewed. To establish timeliness of care, the authors reviewed the time of referral to the UCB provider or nurse, time of arrival to UCB, time evaluated by providers, and time of initiation of treatment. The addition of an UCB to Texas Children's Cancer Center Outpatient Clinic has shown to allow for rapid assessment and initiation of treatment while avoiding unnecessary emergency room care.

The meaning of cancer: implications for family finances and consequent impact on lifestyle, activities, roles and relationships

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the impact that cancer-related financial hardship/worries can have on family life.

METHODS

Forty patients (19 male and 21 female) and 17 carers participated in a qualitative study, which drew on certain elements of grounded theory methods. Participants were 18 years or older and were accessed through a regional cancer centre, an acute National Health Service trust, a support group and the Macmillan Benefits Helpline. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically with the aid of nvivo 7 (QSR International, Cambridge, MA, USA).

RESULTS

Many participants said that prior to experiencing cancer, they had never thought about its effects on finances. The early part of the cancer journey was characterised by a need to be positive about the future, limited discussion about money within families and a lack of action in relation to finances. Many participants, especially those of working age, described cancer-related financial worries and difficulties that had impacted on family lifestyle, roles and relationships. Consequences included house repossession, bankruptcy, loss of independence and relationship breakdown.

CONCLUSIONS

Health and social care professionals have a role in prompting people affected by cancer to take stock of their finances early in the cancer trajectory, in order to avert knock-on effects. An approach that combines hope with proactivity is needed. More work into the long-term effects of financial difficulties/worries and specific financial issues that affect people from Black and minority ethnic backgrounds is needed.

The cost of antiemetic therapy for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving platinum-containing regimens in daily practice in Japan: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of antiemetic therapy for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in daily practice in Japan.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study using medical records. Eligible patients were those with bladder or testicular cancer receiving platinum-containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy. The incidence of CINV on days 1-5 in single-day chemotherapy and on days 1-9 in multiple-day chemotherapy, and the costs of antiemetic therapy directly associated with the administration of antiemetics were estimated. The analysis of costs was performed from a hospital perspective.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients or 169 chemotherapy courses were included. In all chemotherapy courses 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists were used on the day(s) that platinum-containing agents were administered and frequently used on subsequent days. In contrast, the use of corticosteroids was infrequent. Acute CINV in single-day chemotherapy was well controlled, but the incidences of delayed CINV in single-day chemotherapy and CINV in multiple-day chemotherapy were relatively high. The costs for antiemetic therapy were $484.65 in courses with CINV and $318.56 in courses without CINV, and the difference was approximately $170 per chemotherapy course, which was considered to be mainly imputable to the prevalence of CINV.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of antiemetic therapy for CINV is substantial in Japan as well as in other countries, and it is suggested that the onset of CINV is a possible cost driver. The improvements in antiemetic therapy may contribute not only to improved patient well-being but also to a reduction of economic burden.

Clinical and economic burden of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among patients with cancer in a hospital outpatient setting in the United States

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the overall burden of illness of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and associated all-cause costs from a hospital's perspective (costs to the hospital) in patients with cancer treated with chemotherapy (CT) in the US hospital outpatient setting.

METHODS

Patients with a cancer diagnosis aged ≥18 years initiating CT in a hospital outpatient setting for the first time between April 1 2007 and March 31 2009 were extracted from the Premier Perspective Database. Patients were followed through eight CT cycles or 6 months post-index date, whichever occurred first. Within each CT cycle, the follow-up time for CINV event estimation was from day 1 (except rescue medication use that was identified from day 2) to cycle end. A multivariate regression model was developed to predict the CINV event rate per CT cycle in the study follow-up period. Associated total all-cause costs of managing CINV from a hospital's perspective were analyzed descriptively. Event rate and associated costs were estimated in the entire hospital setting (outpatient, inpatient, and emergency room). All-cause costs included inpatient, hospital outpatient, and ER visit costs (identified through a primary or secondary diagnosis code for nausea, vomiting, and/or volume depletion) and pharmacy cost (rescue medications for CINV treatment). All physician costs and non CINV-related treatment (pharmacy) costs were excluded from the analyses.

RESULTS

Among 11,495 study patients, 8,806 patients (76.6%) received prophylaxis for all cycles in the follow-up period. The overall base population had an average age of 63.3 years, was 51.0% female, and 72.7% White. The distribution of emetogenicity for cycle 1 CT cycle was 26.0% HEC, 46.1% MEC, and 26.4% LEC/MinEC combined. In the follow-up period, a total of 47,988 CINV events with an associated total all-cause treatment cost of $89 million were observed. Average daily treatment cost for all care settings was $1854.7. The regression model predicted a 20% CINV event rate per CT cycle in the follow-up period. Study limitations include potential lack of generalizibility, absence of data on certain confounders including alcohol consumption and prior history of motion sickness, lack of a control analysis group to estimate incremental use of resource utilization and associated costs, and a potential for cost under-estimation.

CONCLUSION

In the current study analysis, a 20% CINV event rate per CT cycle per patient was predicted with an associated all-cause average daily total cost of approximately $1850. Further studies on early and appropriate antiemetic prophylaxis on CINV rates and economic outcomes are warranted.

Additional financial costs borne by cancer patients: a narrative review

PURPOSE

To review out-of-pocket costs related to cancer that are borne by patients and their families.

METHODS

A literature search using key terms relating to out-of-pocket costs incurred by cancer patients and their families was undertaken to generate a comprehensive narrative synthesis of the information available.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: measuring costs; sources of costs; the impact of costs and reducing costs. The wide variety of measures for ascertaining hidden costs makes comparison of findings difficult; some articles cover a very narrow range of costs. Qualitative research is useful for elucidating a wide range of costs. Costs pertaining to hospital visits, nutrition and clothing are widely mentioned. Low additional expenditure may indicate that needs/wants are going unmet. Financial capacity to cope and subjective perception of impact are important. Low income, younger age, chemotherapy and living rurally are associated with greater impact. Extra expense can exert long-term effects on family finances. Primary care follow-up, telemedicine and treatments that entail fewer visits may serve to reduce patient costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The key question is how to organise/deliver cancer care in order to reduce additional expenses to patients and families. Future research could identify critical time-points and demographic groups susceptible to significant additional costs, in order to target support at those most in need.

Risk factors at pretreatment predicting treatment-induced nausea and vomiting in Australian cancer patients: a prospective, longitudinal, observational study

PURPOSE

Despite significant advances in antiemetic management, almost 50% of cancer patients still experience nausea and vomiting during treatment. The goal of antiemetic therapy is complete prevention of treatment-induced nausea and/or vomiting (TINV); however, realisation of this goal remains elusive, thus supplementary strategies identifying patients at high risk must be employed in the interim. Consequently, we examined TINV incidence and its risk factors, including patient, clinical and pretreatment quality of life (QOL)/psychological factors.

METHODS

Two hundred newly diagnosed cancer patients beginning combined treatment participated in this prospective, longitudinal, observational study. QOL (including TINV), psychological adjustment, and patient/clinical characteristics were examined at pretreatment, on-treatment (8 weeks ± 1 week) and post-treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, 62% of patients experienced TINV, with TIN incidence (60%) doubling that of TIV (27%). Eight independent risk factors predicted 73% of TIN incidence: high premorbid/anticipatory NV, moderately/highly emetogenic chemotherapy (M/HEC), longer treatment (>3 months), female gender, surgery prior to adjuvant chemotherapy ± radiotherapy, private health insurance and low emotional functioning (pretreatment). Six independent risk factors predicted 77% of TIV incidence: premorbid/anticipatory vomiting, M/HEC, female gender, cancer resection and low role functioning (pretreatment).

CONCLUSIONS

TINV still represents a very major concern for patients. Several pretreatment risk factors for the development of TIN and TIV, respectively, were identified. Patients about to undergo cancer treatment, particularly combined treatment involving emetogenic chemotherapy and surgery, should be screened for these factors with a view to modifying standard pretreatment/maintenance antiemetic therapy. Furthermore, and consistent with recent research, it is recommended that more comprehensive interventions combining antiemetics with other effective pharmacological (e.g. anxiolytics) and non-pharmacological approaches (e.g. acupuncture, relaxation techniques) be considered by clinicians in attempts to improve control of TIN and TIV (and overall QOL) for their patients. In this way, optimal holistic care will be ensured for cancer patients by clinicians providing conventional oncology treatment.

Impact on daily functioning and indirect/direct costs associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in a U.S. population

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a debilitating side effect of chemotherapy, but it may be prevented or mitigated with medications. Uncontrolled CINV can lead to reduced quality of life and can result in increased costs (due to health care utilization and missed work). We prospectively assessed the prevalence and burden of CINV in a US population.

METHODS

Final analysis was performed on 178 patients, beginning chemotherapy during 2007-2008 at oncology specialty settings. Patients kept a diary recording use of antiemetic medications just before the start of chemotherapy and use of antiemetic medications, health care resources, and episodes of nausea and vomiting during the 5 days following. In addition, they completed a Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire and a Work Productivity and Assessment Inventory-Nausea and Vomiting assessment, to determine the impact of CINV on daily functioning and on work productivity, respectively. Physicians independently recorded prescribed medications and health care utilization.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 61.2% reported experiencing CINV (34.3% with acute CINV and 58.4% with delayed CINV). Based on the FLIE assessment, 37.2% of all patients reported reduced daily functioning, and of those with poorly managed CINV, about 90% reported a significant impact on daily functioning. Total costs due to CINV were on average $778.58 per patient from the day of administration through the 5 days following the first cycle of chemotherapy; patients with more severe CINV typically had higher costs.

CONCLUSIONS

CINV remains a significant problem among US patients, suggesting a need for more effective prophylaxis use in clinical practice.

A review of the role of emergency nurses in management of chemotherapy-related complications

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To examine the role of emergency nurses in caring for patients who receive chemotherapy in ambulatory oncology settings. Reasons for emergency department presentations are examined, specific sources of clinical risk for patients receiving chemotherapy who require emergency care are discussed and cost implications of emergency department presentations related to chemotherapy are analysed.

BACKGROUND

Given the increased administration of chemotherapy in ambulatory settings, emergency nurses play an important role in the management of patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Emergency departments are the major entry point for acute inpatient hospital care of complications arising from chemotherapy.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy-related emergency department presentations have considerable clinical and cost implications for patients and the healthcare system. Strategies to improve emergency department management of chemotherapy complications and reduction in preventable emergency department presentations has significant implications for improving cancer patients' quality of life and reducing the cost of cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses are well placed to play a pivotal role in chemotherapy management and lead interventions such as a specialist oncology nursing roles that provide information and support to guide patients through their chemotherapy cycles. These interventions may prevent emergency department presentations for patients receiving chemotherapy in ambulatory settings.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Patients receiving chemotherapy require access to specialised care to manage distressing symptoms, as they are at significant clinical risk because of immunosuppression and may not exhibit the usual signs of critical illness. A team approach both within and across nursing specialities may improve care for patients receiving chemotherapy and increase effective use of healthcare resources.

Safety of ondansetron loading doses in children with cancer

INTRODUCTION

In highly emetogenic chemotherapy, the recommended dose of the serotonin-receptor antagonist ondansetron (5 mg/m(2) q8h) may be insufficient to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. In adults, ondansetron-loading doses (OLD) of 32 mg are safe. We aimed to evaluate in children the safety of an OLD of 16 mg/m(2) (top, 24 mg) i.v., followed by two doses of 5 mg/m(2) q8h.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included all pediatric oncology patients having received > or =1 OLD between 2002 and 2005. Adverse events (AE) definitely, probably, or possibly related to OLD were studied, excluding AE not or unlikely related to the OLD. Associations between potential predictors and at least moderate AE were analyzed by mixed logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 167 patients treated with chemotherapy, 37 (22%) received 543 OLD. The most common AE were hypotension, fatigue, injection site reaction, headache, hot flashes/flushes, and dizziness. At least mild AE were described in 139 OLD (26%), at least moderate AE in 23 (4.2%), and severe AE in 5 (0.9%; exact 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-2.1). Life-threatening or lethal AE were not observed (0.0%; 0.0-0.6). At least moderate AE were significantly more frequent in female patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.5; 95% CI 1.4-8.8; p = 0.010), after erroneously given second OLD (17.0; 1.9-154; p = 0.012) and higher 24 h cumulative surface corrected dose (1.26 per mg/m(2); 1.06-1.51; p = 0.009). OLD given to infants below 2 years were not associated with more frequent AE.

CONCLUSIONS

Ondansetron-loading doses of 16 mg/m(2) (top, 24 mg) i.v. seem to be safe in infants, children, and adolescents.