One third of patients with radiotherapy-induced nausea consider their antiemetic treatment insufficient

[Update of guidelines of the AFSOS, SFRO, SFH, SFNCM, SFCE, GFRP for the management of radio-induced nausea and vomiting]

BACKGROUND

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting have mutiple clinical consequences: delay or refusal of irradiation (decreased antineoplastic efficacy of irradiation), altered quality of life, dehydration, malnutrition, interruption of treatment, decompensation of comorbidities and aspiration. These guidelines aim at defining good clinical practices for management of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV).

METHODS

AFSOS, SFRO, SFH, SFNEP, SFCE and GFRP applied an expert consensus methodology to propose updated guidelines.

RESULTS

RINV are underdiagnosed and undertreated. Assessment of the emetogenic risk depends on two main factors: 1) the irradiated anatomical localization and 2) the associated concomitant chemotherapy. In case of exclusive radiotherapy, primary antiemetic prophylaxis depends on the emetogenic risk of irradiated anatomical localization. Primary antiemetic prophylaxis is initiated at the onset of irradiation and continues until 24h after the end of the irradiation. In the case of concomitant radiochemotherapy, the emetogenic risk is generally higher for chemotherapy and the primary antiemetic prophylaxis corresponds to that of chemo-induced nausea and vomiting. In the case of persistence of these symptoms, subject to a well-conducted treatment, a rigorous diagnostic procedure must be carried out before being attributed to radiotherapy and precise evaluation of their impact. Remedial treatments are less well codified.

CONCLUSION

It is essential to know and good management practices for radiation-induced nausea and vomiting.

Incidence of Radiation-induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Prospective Single-institution Pilot Study

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) is a frequent adverse event that occurs in patients undergoing radiotherapy. However, research on RINV is underrepresented. This prospective single-institution exploratory pilot study investigated the incidence of RINV according to the irradiation site and observed the efficacy of symptomatic antiemetic treatment in controlling symptoms of RINV. The primary outcomes were the proportions of emesis-free days and nausea-free days. The secondary endpoints included the time to the first episode of RINV, frequency of vomiting, and severity of nausea, including its impact on eating habits and weight loss. Fifteen patients were enrolled in each group (minimal, low, and moderate emetogenic risk). All patients received greater than 20 Gy in five fractions. Evaluation was based on weekly questionnaires completed by patients during routine clinic visits. Nausea and vomiting occurred in 11 and 0 patients, respectively. Six of 15 patients in the minimal-risk group, 1 in the low-risk group, and 4 in the moderate-risk group experienced nausea. Although all 11 symptomatic patients were offered antiemetics, only 3 used them, who reported satisfactory control of nausea. The percentage of emesis-free days for all patients was 100% and the percentage of nausea-free days for the 11 patients who developed RINV was 38%. An unexpectedly high percentage of patients in the minimal-risk group experienced nausea; all had breast cancer. Future studies should investigate factors beyond the irradiation site, including the characteristics of the patient and the treatment, to better predict an individual's risk of RINV.

Impact of fosaprepitant in the prevention of nausea and emesis in head and neck cancer patients undergoing cisplatin-based chemoradiation: a pilot prospective study and a review of literature

PURPOSE

Cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is standard treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, IMRT may increase chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of fosaprepitant in preventing CINV.

METHODS

An infusion of 150 mg fosaprepitant was given through a 30 min. We assessed acute toxicity using CTCAE v.4 and the incidence of CINV using the FLIE questionnaire. The evaluation of CINV was done at the second and fifth weeks of CRT and 1 week after the end. The EORTC QLQ-HN 43 questionnaire was administered before treatment beginning (baseline), at second (T1) and fifth (T2) weeks. A dosimetric analysis was performed on dorsal nucleus of vagus (DVC) and area postrema (AP).

RESULTS

Between March and November 2020, 24 patients were enrolled. No correlation was found between nausea and DVC mean dose (p = 0.573), and AP mean dose (p = 0.869). Based on the FLIE questionnaire, patients reported a mean score of 30.5 for nausea and 30 for vomiting during week 2 and 29.8 for nausea and 29.2 for vomiting during week 5. After treatment ended, the mean scores were 27.4 for nausea and 27.7 for vomiting. All patients completed the EORTC QLQ-HN 43. Significantly higher scores at T2 assessment than baseline were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of fosaprepitant in preventing CINV reduced incidence of moderate to severe nausea and vomiting. No correlation has been found between nausea and median dose to DVC and AP.

A Study of Self-Care Practice in Routine Radiotherapy Care: Identifying Differences Between Practitioners and Non-Practitioners in Sociodemographic, Clinical, Functional, and Quality-of-Life-Related Characteristics

Objectives:

The objective of this study was to describe self-care practice during radiotherapy for cancer and to identify potential differences between practitioners and non-practitioners of self-care regarding sociodemographic, clinical, functional, and quality-of-life-related characteristics.

Methods:

In this descriptive study, 439 patients (87% response rate) undergoing radiotherapy responded to a study questionnaire regarding self-care, sociodemographic, clinical (eg, experienced symptoms), functional, and quality-of-life-related characteristics.

Results:

Of the 439 patients, 189 (43%) practiced at least one self-care strategy, while 250 (57%) did not. In total, the patients described 332 self-care practices, resulting in 14 different categories of self-care strategies. The 5 most common indicators of practicing self-care were fatigue, general wellbeing, psychological symptoms, nausea, vomiting and improving physical condition. The 5 most common self-care strategies were physical activity, increased recovery, healthy eating, distraction, and skincare. Patients who were married, were older than 69, patients with less education than university education, patients undergoing a combination of internal and external radiotherapy, patients experiencing fewer than 8 symptoms, and better quality of life, practiced self-care to a lower extent than did other patients. Functional capacity did not differ between self-care practitioners and non-practitioners.

Conclusion and Implications for Practice:

Of the patients undergoing radiotherapy, slightly less than half practiced self-care during an ordinary week of radiotherapy. Because older and less-educated patients were less likely to practice self-care, cancer care practitioners should consider paying particular attention to helping such patients with their self-care practice.

Antiemetic prophylaxis for chemoradiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in locally advanced head and heck squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective phase II trial

Background

There is sparse research reporting effective interventions for preventing nausea and emesis caused by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC).

Methods

Treatment-naïve LA-HNSCC patients received intensity-modulated radiotherapy with concomitant cisplatin 100 mg/m² (33 mg/m²/days [d]1–3) every 3 weeks for two cycles. All patients were given oral aprepitant 125 mg once on d1, then 80 mg once on d2–5; ondansetron 8 mg once on d1; and dexamethasone 12 mg once on d1, then 8 mg on d2–5. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR). Pursuant to δ = 0.2 and α = 0.05, the expected CR rate was 80%.

Results

A total of 43 patients with LA-HNSCC were enrolled. The median age was 53 years, and 86.0% were male. All patients received radiotherapy and 86.0% of patients completed both cycles as planned. The overall CR rate was 86.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 72.1–94.7). The CR rates for cycles 1 and 2 were 88.4% (95% CI: 74.9–96.1) and 89.2% (95% CI: 74.6–97.0). The complete protection rate in the overall phase was 72.1% (95% CI: 56.3–84.7). The emesis-free and nausea-free responses in the overall phase were 88.4% (95% CI: 74.9–96.1) and 60.5% (95% CI: 44.4–75.0), respectively. The adverse events related to antiemetics were constipation (65.1%) and hiccups (16.3%), but both were grade 1–2. There was no grade 4 or 5 treatment-related toxicity with antiemetic usage.

Conclusion

The addition of aprepitant into ondansetron and dexamethasone provided effective protection from nausea and emesis in patients with LA-HNSCC receiving radiotherapy and concomitant high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.

Acupuncture in Patients Undergoing Cancer Therapy: Their Interest and Belief in Acupuncture is High, But Few are Using It

OBJECTIVES

Since pre-existing expectations, that is, beliefs, in a treatment may modify outcomes, and acupuncture studies often fail to measure expectations, we wanted to investigate the use of acupuncture, interest, and belief in acupuncture effects among patients undergoing cancer therapy.

METHOD

A cross-sectional design, where the participants answered a study-specific questionnaire with questions regarding their use of, interest and belief in acupuncture treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 457 patients with cancer (48% men, mean age 65 years) answered the questionnaire. Acupuncture was used by 4 (1%) patients during their cancer therapy, and 368 (83%) expressed an interest in receiving acupuncture. Of the 457 patients, 289 (63%) believed acupuncture to be effective for at least 1 of 17 requested symptoms, most commonly pain (56% of the patients) and muscle tension (40%). They believed acupuncture to be effective for a mean value 3 of the 17 requested symptoms. Women (P < .001), and patients 41 to 65 years (P < .001), expressed a stronger belief in acupuncture effects than others.

CONCLUSIONS

Men and older patients expressed weaker beliefs in acupuncture effects than other patients, indicating the importance of collecting expectancy data in future randomized sham-controlled acupuncture studies to be able to treat expectancy as an effect-modifier. The high interest and beliefs in acupuncture effects found also indicate that acupuncture should be available for patients with cancer, for side effects where acupuncture has shown to be effective. In a clinical setting, older men might need more encouragement regarding positive expected outcomes of the acupuncture treatment than younger women.

Implementation of Acupuncture in Routine Oncology Care: A Comparison of Physicians’, Nurses’, Physiotherapists’ and Acupuncturists’ Practice and Beliefs

Background:

It is important to investigate beliefs in acupuncture in professionals because professionals’ expectations may affect treatment outcomes.

Aim:

To document the type, number, and education of professionals practicing acupuncture. Further, to compare beliefs about the effectiveness of acupuncture for common cancer related symptoms in the different types of professionals.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study employed a questionnaire on practice and beliefs regarding acupuncture effects for symptoms that commonly occur in patients treated within oncology care settings. The respondents (n = 555) consisted of oncology professionals that is, physicians (n = 133), nurses (n = 172), and physiotherapists (n = 117). Additional respondents consisted of acupuncturists (n = 133), working outside approved health care.

Results:

Of the respondents, acupuncture was practiced by 4% of the physicians, 6% of the nurses, 58% of the physiotherapists, and 90% of the acupuncturists. The professionals believed acupuncture to be effective for pain (of the physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, and acupuncturists, 94%, 98%, 89%, and 99% respectively believed in the effectiveness), chemotherapy-induced nausea (corresponding figures: 74%, 89%, 89%, and 93%), and vasomotor symptoms (corresponding figures: 71%, 81%, 80%, and 97%). The physicians believed acupuncture to be effective in a mean of 5 symptoms, nurses in 6 symptoms, physiotherapists in 6 symptoms, and acupuncturists in 10 symptoms ( P < .001).

Conclusions:

Since the professionals varied substantially regarding practice, education and beliefs in acupuncture, oncology clinics may consider delivering patient preferred acupuncture according to evidence-informed guidelines rather than on varying preferences among the professionals, since professionals’ treatment expectations may modify treatment outcomes.

Sleep During Pelvic-Abdominal Radiotherapy for Cancer: A Longitudinal Study With Special Attention to Sleep in Relation to Nausea and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Poor sleep, nausea, psychological distress, and a lowered quality of life are common during radiotherapy for cancer. There is a lack of studies on the relationship between radiotherapy-induced nausea and sleep. This longitudinal study analyzes data from 196 patients who underwent pelvic-abdominal radiotherapy for cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate sleep parameters weekly before, during, and after radiotherapy in relation to nausea and other patient characteristics, clinical characteristics, psychological distress, and quality of life.

METHODS

Patients (n = 196, 84% women; mean age, 63 years; 68% had gynecological tumor, 28% had colorectal tumor, and 4% had other tumors) longitudinally answered questionnaires before, during, and after their radiotherapy over the abdominal and pelvic fields.

RESULTS

Poor sleep was experienced by 30% of the participants, and sleep (quality and difficulty falling asleep) improved during and after treatment compared with baseline. Experiencing nausea during treatment was associated with worse sleep quality during radiotherapy. Baseline anxiety was associated with worse sleep quality before, during, and after treatment. Poor sleep was associated with worse quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Nausea, more than a number of other variables, is a possible predictor of poor sleep in patients during radiotherapy for cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The results indicate that effectively managing nausea may be important for sleep quality, and possibly quality of life, in patients undergoing radiotherapy for cancer. More research is needed before recommendations for practice can be made.

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting: a clinical audit of prophylactic antiemetic use

Introduction:

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) is a common side effect of single fraction palliative radiotherapy. Patients experiencing RINV have significantly reduced quality of life and a prescription of prophylactic antiemetics, principally 5-HT3 antagonists, is recommended. There is a growing body of evidence relating to indications for this, but as yet there are no national guidelines.

Methods:

A retrospective audit aimed to determine the extent to which patients at high and moderate emetogenic risk receiving single fraction radiotherapy were prescribed prophylactic emetic medication in line with the current evidence base.

Results:

A total of 60 patients were included in the audit; of these patients, 50 were consented for the risk of nausea and/or vomiting. Prophylactic antiemetics were only prescribed to 28 (46·7%) of all audited patients. Out of the 50 patients who provided informed consent, only 24 (48%) were prescribed an antiemetic prior to their treatment.

Conclusion:

Antiemetic prescribing for single fraction patients at moderate to high emetogenic risk at a large regional centre is underutilised in relation to published evidence. Amended guidance and further audits are recommended to ensure that this patient group is best supported.

Methodology Aspects of Nausea Measuring During Pelvic Radiotherapy: Daily Nausea Measuring Is Successful to Identify Patients Experiencing Nausea

BACKGROUND

Nausea seems underreported during pelvic radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to investigate if a 5-week recall measure of nausea covering the entire radiotherapy period was comparable with accumulated daily nausea measurements and to investigate if the measuring method affected potential difference in quality of life (QoL) between nauseated patients and patients free from nausea.

METHODS

This longitudinal methodology study covered 200 patients (mean age, 64 years; 84% women; 69% had gynecological cancer). The patients graded QoL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General). They registered nausea daily and at a 5-week recall at the end of radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The nausea-intensity category scale and visual analog scale correlated well (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.622). According to the 5-week recall, 57 of 157 answering patients (36%) experienced nausea during the radiotherapy period. Using the daily nausea measurements, 94 of 157 patients (60%) experienced nausea (relative risk, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-2.10). Of these 94 nauseated patients, 39 (42%) did not report nausea using the 5-week recall. The nauseated patients experienced worse QoL (physical/functional subscores) than patients free from nausea whether nausea was registered daily or at the 5-week recall.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost half, 42%, of the patients who experienced nausea according to daily nausea measurements did not report having had nausea according to the 5-week recall. Nauseated patients graded worse QoL than patients who were free from nausea.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nursing professionals should measure nausea repeatedly to identify patients at risk of nausea and worsened QoL, to be able to deliver evidence-based antiemetic treatment strategies.

A multidisciplinary expert opinion on CINV and RINV, unmet needs and practical real-life approaches

Introduction: A range of combination chemotherapy regimens are currently used in clinical practice. However, international antiemetic guidelines often only categorize the emetogenic potential of single agents rather than the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens. To manage the nausea and vomiting induced by antineoplastic combinations, guidelines suggest antiemetics that are appropriate for the component drug with the highest emetogenic potential. Furthermore, antiemetic guidelines generally do not consider the influence of other factors, including individual patient characteristics, on the emetic effects of cancer treatments. Similarly, the emetogenic potential of radiotherapy is stratified only according to the site of radiation, while other factors contributing to emetic risk are overlooked.Areas covered: An Expert Panel was convened to examine unresolved issues and summarize the current clinical research on managing nausea and vomiting associated with combination chemotherapy and radiotherapy.Expert opinion: The panel identified the incidence of nausea and vomiting induced by multi-drug combination therapies currently used to treat cancer at different anatomic sites and by radiotherapy in the presence of other risk factors. Based on these data and the clinical experience of panel members, several suggestions are made for a practical approach to prevent or manage nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy regimens and radiation therapy.

Change in symptom clusters in head and neck cancer patients undergoing postoperative radiotherapy: A longitudinal study

PURPOSE

Research on symptom clusters is a newly emerging field in oncology; however, little evidence regarding symptom clusters in head and neck cancer (HNC) is currently available. To clarify this under-researched area, we investigated symptom clusters among patients with HNC treated with surgery and postoperative radiotherapy. We also examined the pattern of symptom clusters throughout the treatment course.

METHOD

A convenience sample of 100 patients with HNC was recruited in the Ear, Nose, and Throat unit of a medical center in Taiwan. Before undergoing postoperative radiotherapy, patients were asked to complete the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and a demographic sheet. Patients completed the same inventory questionnaire at week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of radiotherapy.

RESULT

Two symptom clusters were observed, and they were stable throughout the course of radiotherapy. Cluster 1, the HNC-specific cluster, comprised the symptoms of pain, dry mouth, lack of appetite, sleep disturbance, fatigue, drowsiness, distress, and sadness. Cluster 2, the gastrointestinal cluster, included nausea, vomiting, numbness, shortness of breath, and difficulty remembering.

CONCLUSION

This study advanced our knowledge of symptom clusters in patients with HNC. The results are expected to contribute to the development of appropriate assessment and nursing interventions targeting multiple symptoms that may coexist in postoperative radiotherapy.

Impact of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting on quality of life

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a common side effect of radiotherapy. It is well-established that nausea and vomiting have a negative impact on quality of life, but the relative influence of each of symptom is infrequently reported. This study aimed to compare the effects of nausea and vomiting on quality of life in cancer patients receiving palliative radiotherapy.

METHODS

The Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) is a quality of life questionnaire developed in the chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting setting. The FLIE consists of 18 questions, half of which address nausea and half of which address vomiting. Three prospective studies on the efficacy of various anti-emetic medications conducted at our center used the FLIE to assess radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting at various time points during and after palliative radiotherapy. FLIE data from these three studies were combined for the present analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the relationships between nausea and vomiting, time of FLIE completion, and patient-reported quality of life.

RESULTS

Nausea and vomiting scores both decreased patients' quality of life. Multivariate modeling showed that both symptoms significantly influenced patients' ability to enjoy meals. Nausea was also associated with increased hardship for the patient, while vomiting imposed more difficulty on the patients' loved ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Nausea and vomiting both significantly influence quality of life. Nausea seems to impact the patient more directly, whereas vomiting affects those closest to the patient.

Effectiveness and toxicity of conventional radiotherapy treatment for painful spinal metastases: a detailed course of side effects after opposing fields versus a single posterior field technique

Background

Conventional radiotherapy for painful spinal metastases can be delivered with a single posterior-anterior (PA) or two opposed anterior-posterior (APPA) fields. We studied the effectiveness and toxicity of both techniques and studied whether treatment technique was predictive for abdominal and skin toxicity.

Patients and methods

Within the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study, 343 patients received 8 Gray in a single fraction or 24 Gray in six fractions for painful spinal metastases. Treatment technique was not randomized. At baseline and weekly during follow-up, patients reported pain and other physical complaints. Any complaint increasing within 4 weeks after treatment was noted as a side effect. Pain response was calculated according to international standards, taking into account changes in pain score and medication. Repeated measurement analyses and multivariate logistic analyses were performed.

Results

Patients were mainly treated on the thoracic (34%) and lumbar (53%) spine and 73% received a PA field. Pain response was similar between both techniques (74%). In patients treated at the thoraco-lumbar and lumbar spine, with multiple fractions, significantly more abdominal complaints were noticed. In multivariate analysis, radiotherapy technique did not predict for side effects.

Conclusion

Conventional radiotherapy of painful spinal metastases provides limited toxicity. Radiotherapy technique is not an independent predictor of abdominal and skin toxicity of irradiation.

Randomized study exploring the combination of radiotherapy with two types of acupuncture treatment (ROSETTA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Adverse effects such as fatigue, pain, erythema, nausea and vomiting are commonly known in patients undergoing irradiation (RT) alone or in combination with chemotherapy (RCHT). Patients suffering from these symptoms are limited in their daily life and their quality of life (QOL) is often reduced. As addressed in several trials, acupuncture can cause amelioration of these specific disorders. Especially for pain symptoms, several groups have shown efficacy of acupuncture. To what extent the difference between traditional acupuncture (verum acupuncture) and false acupuncture (sham acupuncture) is in reducing side effects and improvement of QOL is not clear.

Methods/design

ROSETTA is a prospective randomized phase II trial (version 1.0) to examine the efficacy of traditional acupuncture in patients with RT-related side effects. In the experimental (verum) arm (n = 37) an experienced acupuncture-trained person will treat dedicated acupuncture points. In the control (sham) arm (n = 37) sham acupuncture will be performed to provide a blinded comparison of results.

Discussion

This is the first randomized prospective trial to evaluate the effect of traditional acupuncture on RT-related side effects such as fatigue and QOL.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02674646. Registered on 8 December 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2139-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Complementary and alternative medicine self-care strategies for nausea in patients undergoing abdominal or pelvic irradiation for cancer: A longitudinal observational study of implementation in routine care

OBJECTIVE

To longitudinally describe practice of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) self-care strategies for nausea during radiotherapy.

METHODS

Two hundred patients daily registered nausea and practice of CAM self-care strategies, beside conventional antiemetic medications, for nausea during abdominal/pelvic irradiation (median five weeks) for gynecological (69%) colorectal (27%) or other tumors (4%).

RESULTS

During radiotherapy, 131 (66%) experienced nausea, and 50 (25%) practiced self-care for nausea at least once, for a mean (m) of 15.9days. The six of 50 patients who stayed free from nausea practiced self-care more frequent (m=25.8days) than the 44 patients experiencing nausea (m=14.5) (p=0.013). The CAM self-care strategies were: modifying eating (80% of all self-care practicing patients, 80% of the nauseous patients versus 83% of the patients free from nausea; ns) or drinking habits (38%, 41% vs 17%; ns), taking rests (18%, 20% vs 0%; ns), physical exercising (6%, 2% vs 33%; p=0.035), acupressure (4%, 5% vs 0%; ns) and self-induced vomiting (2%, 2% vs 0%; ns).

CONCLUSION

A fourth of patients undergoing emetogenic radiotherapy practiced CAM self-care for nausea, mostly by modifying eating or drinking habits. The CAM self-care practicing patients who did not become nauseous practiced self-care more frequent than the nauseous patients did. To make such self-care evidence based, we need studies evaluating its efficacy.

Patients' and physiotherapists' belief in and use of acupuncture for cancer-related symptoms

BACKGROUND

It is important to investigate attitudes to acupuncture, because therapists' and patients' expectations may affect the treatment outcome.

AIM

To explore the use of and belief in acupuncture among oncological physiotherapists and to explore patients' interest in receiving acupuncture during cancer therapy and their belief in its effectiveness.

METHODS

522 patients (80% female, mean age 67 years) reported on their interest in receiving acupuncture for nausea during radiotherapy treatment; a subgroup (n=198) additionally disclosed their belief in the effectiveness of acupuncture. 117 Swedish oncological physiotherapists (96% female, mean age 48 years) answered a questionnaire regarding their use of and belief in acupuncture.

RESULTS

Of the patients initiating cancer therapy, 359 (69%) were interested in receiving acupuncture. The patients believed acupuncture to be effective for pain (79%), nausea (79%) and vasomotor symptoms (48%). Of the 117 physiotherapists, 66 (56%) practised acupuncture. Physiotherapists generally believed in the effectiveness of acupuncture. For pain, 89% believed that acupuncture was effective and 42% of them practised it. Similar responses were noted for chemotherapy-induced nausea (86% and 38%, respectively) and vasomotor symptoms (80% and 28%, respectively). Younger physiotherapists and patients were more likely to believe in the effectiveness of acupuncture compared with older ones.

CONCLUSIONS

More than two thirds of patients with cancer were interested in receiving acupuncture during therapy. Patients and oncological physiotherapists believed that acupuncture was effective for cancer pain, nausea and vasomotor symptoms. Further studies of acupuncture for cancer-related symptoms and of the effect of patients' and clinicians' therapeutic relationships, including treatment expectations, would be welcome.

Vicious circle of acute radiation toxicities and weight loss predicts poor prognosis for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients receiving intensity modulated radiotherapy

Background: Weight loss during radiotherapy has been known as a negative prognostic factor for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients, but the factors related to weight loss during radiotherapy were not fully understood.

Methods: A total of 322 newly diagnosed NPC patients receiving intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between June 2002 and August 2006 were enrolled. Kaplan-Meier methods and log-rank test were applied for survival analysis; a multiple regression was used to identify the factors related to weight loss during radiotherapy.

Results: The mean and median values of weight loss (%) during radiotherapy were 6.85% and 6.70%. NPC patients with critical weight loss (> 5.4%) have poorer overall survival (OS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) than the patients without critical weight loss (p = 0.002 and 0.021, respectively). Pre-radiotherapy weight, acute mucosal toxicity, acute pharynx and esophagus toxicity, and acute upper gastrointestinal toxicity were related to the weight loss during radiotherapy independently (p = 0.01, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.009, respectively).

Conclusions: Acute radiation toxicities had significant and independent impact on weight loss during radiotherapy. The vicious circle of acute radiation toxicities and weight loss had bad effect on prognosis of NPC patients.

Reduced Need for Rescue Antiemetics and Improved Capacity to Eat in Patients Receiving Acupuncture Compared to Patients Receiving Sham Acupuncture or Standard Care during Radiotherapy

Objective. To evaluate if consumption of emesis-related care and eating capacity differed between patients receiving verum acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or standard care only during radiotherapy. Methods. Patients were randomized to verum (n = 100) or sham (n = 100) acupuncture (telescopic blunt sham needle) (median 12 sessions) and registered daily their consumption of antiemetics and eating capacity. A standard care group (n = 62) received standard care only and delivered these data once. Results. More patients in the verum (n = 73 of 89 patients still undergoing radiotherapy; 82%, Relative Risk (RR) 1.23, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.01–1.50) and the sham acupuncture group (n = 79 of 95; 83%, RR 1.24, CI 1.03–1.52) did not need any antiemetic medications, as compared to the standard care group (n = 42 out of 63; 67%) after receiving 27 Gray dose of radiotherapy. More patients in the verum (n = 50 of 89; 56%, RR 1.78, CI 1.31–2.42) and the sham acupuncture group (n = 58 of 94 answering patients; 62%, RR 1.83, CI 1.20–2.80) were capable of eating as usual, compared to the standard care group (n = 20 of 63; 39%). Conclusion. Patients receiving acupuncture had lower consumption of antiemetics and better eating capacity than patients receiving standard antiemetic care, plausible by nonspecific effects of the extra care during acupuncture.

Patient-practitioner perception gap in treatment-induced nausea and vomiting

This UK cohort analysis of a European survey evaluated the differences between health professionals and cancer patients regarding the perceived incidence, impact and drug management of chemotherapy/radiotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting (CINV/RINV). The UK healthcare system is unique in that it has dedicated oncology clinical nurse specialists. The analysis found that more patients experienced nausea following their most recent treatment cycle than vomiting. Health professionals overestimated the incidence of CINV/RINV but underestimated its impact on patients' daily lives, particularly in cases of mild and moderate nausea/vomiting. The level of antiemetic cover initiated and degree of symptom control was often suboptimal. Patients under-reported symptoms, primarily because they considered nausea/vomiting an inevitable side effect of treatment. Altogether, 42% of patients reported full adherence to their antiemetic regimen. Leading factors for non-adherence included not having a 'preventive mindset', low symptom severity and a reluctance to increase pill burden. In conclusion, there is a perceptual gap between health professionals and patients around experiences of CINV/RINV. Advances in management depend on enhancing health professional-patient communication, and reporting and understanding nausea as a distinct issue.

Use of acupuncture to alleviate side effects in radiation oncology: Current evidence and future directions

Several reports have shown that acupuncture is an effective method of complementary medicine; however, only a few of these reports have focused on oncological patients treated with radiation therapy. Most of these studies discuss a benefit of acupuncture for side-effect reduction; however, not all could demonstrate significant improvements. Thus, innovative trial designs are necessary to confirm that acupuncture can alleviate side effects related to radiation therapy. In the present manuscript, we perform a broad review and discuss pitfalls and limitations of acupuncture in parallel with standard radiation therapy, which lead the way to novel treatment concepts.

Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting: Is ABO blood group as important as radiation and patient-related factors? An observational study

Despite the improvements in cancer screening and treatment, it still remains as one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Nausea and vomiting as the side effects of different cancer treatment modalities, such as radiotherapy, are multifactorial and could affect the treatment continuation and patient quality of life. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the possible linkage between ABO blood groups and radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV), also its incidence and affecting factors.One hundred twenty-eight patients referring to Tohid hospital of Sanandaj, Iran, were selected and the patients and treatment-related factors were determined in a cross-sectional study. Patients' nausea and vomiting were recorded from the onset of treatment until 1 week after treatment accomplishment. Also, previous possible nausea and vomiting were recorded. The frequencies of nausea and vomiting and their peak time were examined during the treatment period.The association between ABO blood group and the incidence of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) were significant and it seems that A blood group patients are the most vulnerable individuals to these symptoms. The association between Rhesus antigen and the time of maximum severity of RINV may indicate that Rhesus antigen affects the time of maximum severity of RINV. The incidence of RINV was not affected by karnofsky performance status, but it was related to the severity of RINV. Furthermore, among the factors affecting the incidence of nausea and vomiting, nausea and vomiting during patient's previous chemotherapy, radiotherapy region, and background gastrointestinal disease were shown to be three important factors.In addition to familiar RINV-affecting factors, ABO blood group may play an important role and these results address the needs for further studies with larger sample size.

Nausea and vomiting induced by gastrointestinal radiation therapy: current status and future directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Radiation therapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) are common and troublesome symptoms among patients receiving radiation therapy for gastrointestinal cancers. Their impact on function, quality of life and, ultimately, cancer control warrant a review of their incidence, underlying mechanisms, treatments and research themes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research in RINV is underrepresented relative to that in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The incidence of RINV among patients receiving modern day radiation therapy is questioned and supportive care practice patterns vary among radiation oncologists. Antiemetic guideline recommendations for prophylactic and rescue therapy are based solely on the anatomic region being irradiated and not other patient-related, radiation therapy-related, or organ-specific dosimetric factors that likely modulate the risk of RINV. Dosimetric predictors are likely the most attainable biomarker moving forward, but only early steps have been taken. The small bowel and stomach will be the best first candidates for study among patients with gastrointestinal cancers. Studies of the mechanisms underlying RINV are conspicuously lacking. A new generation of observational studies and therapeutic clinical trials is needed, and more attention must be given to the relative impact of nausea and vomiting on the function and quality of life among specific homogeneous patient populations.

SUMMARY

Optimal supportive care strategies for RINV following radiation therapy for gastrointestinal cancers are lacking, and will not be known until future research answers the many open questions regarding the mechanisms underlying RINV, the true incidence and impact of these symptoms among patients and the best way to predict and mitigate them.

Improving Quality of Life With Nabilone During Radiotherapy Treatments for Head and Neck Cancers

Objectives:

Patients treated for head and neck carcinomas experience a significant deterioration of their quality of life during treatments because of severe side effects. Nabilone has many properties that could alleviate symptoms caused by radiotherapy and improve patients’ quality of life. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of nabilone versus placebo on the quality of life and side effects during radiotherapy for head and neck carcinomas.

Methods:

Fifty-six patients were randomized to nabilone or placebo. Patients filled the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-H&N35; three independent questionnaires assessing appetite, nausea, and toxicity; and a visual analog scale for pain. These data were collected before radiotherapy, each week during radiotherapy, and 4 weeks after radiotherapy. Patients were weighed every week.

Results:

Nabilone did not lengthen the time necessary for a 15% deterioration of quality of life ( P = .4279), and it was not better than placebo for relieving symptoms like pain ( P = .6048), nausea ( P = .7105), loss of appetite ( P = .3295), weight ( P = .1454), mood ( P = .3214), and sleep ( P = .4438).

Conclusion:

At the dosage used, nabilone was not potent enough to improve the patients’ quality of life over placebo.

Prophylactic Management of Radiation-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

The incidence of nausea and vomiting after radiotherapy is often underestimated by physicians, though some 50–80% of patients may experience these symptoms. The occurrence of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) will depend on radiotherapy-related factors, such as the site of irradiation, the dosing, fractionation, irradiated volume, and radiotherapy techniques. Patients should receive antiemetic prophylaxis as suggested by the international antiemetic guidelines based upon a risk assessment, taking especially into account the affected anatomic region and the planned radiotherapy regimen. In this field the international guidelines from the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines as well as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) are widely endorsed. The emetogenicity of radiotherapy regimens and recommendations for the appropriate use of antiemetics including 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists, steroids, and other antiemetics will be reviewed in regard to the applied radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy regimen.

Symptom clusters of gastrointestinal cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy using the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) quality-of-life tool

OBJECTIVE

The Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) instrument is a validated nausea and vomiting specific quality of life (QOL) tool originally created as a 3-day test of the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on cancer patients' daily life. The primary objective of the present study was to retrospectively explore the use of the FLIE from data obtained in a previously published study of patients with gastrointestinal radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) and compare the extracted symptom clusters on a weekly basis for the entirety of gastrointestinal cancer patients' radiotherapy treatments.

METHODS

QOL was assessed on a weekly basis using the 18-item FLIE questionnaire for patients' radiotherapy treatments. A principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed at each visit. The internal consistency and reliability of the derived clusters was assessed with Cronbach's alpha. Robust relationship and correlation among symptoms was displayed with biplot graphics.

RESULTS

A total of 460 FLIE assessments were completed for the 86 gastrointestinal patients who underwent radiotherapy. Two components were consistently identified except for week 5 where only one component was identified. Component 1 contained the items "Q10-Q18" which included all vomiting items. Component 2 included all nausea items from "Q1 to Q9". All the variables were well accounted for by two components for most weeks of treatment with excellent internal consistency. Biplots indicate that the two symptom clusters were evident at each week, with the exception of the first week of treatment. Strong correlations were seen between the effect of nausea on patients' ability to make meals, patients' ability to do tasks within the home, and patients' willingness to spend time with family and friends.

CONCLUSION

The high internal consistency at all timepoints indicates that the FLIE QOL instrument is useful for the RINV population.

Patients' Perspectives on Integrating Acupuncture into the Radiation Oncology Setting

INTRODUCTION

Acupuncture has potential as a supportive care service for cancer symptom management. However, little is known about patients' willingness to use acupuncture in the context of conventional cancer care.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a cross-sectional survey study among patients with cancer during their last week of fractionated/external beam radiotherapy (RT). The main outcome variable was self-reported likelihood of using acupuncture during RT. Knowledge about acupuncture and pain severity was measured along with socio-demographic and clinical variables. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with willingness to use acupuncture.

RESULTS

Among the 305 participants, 79 (26.4%) were likely to use acupuncture during RT if such services were offered at a reasonable price, 143 (46.9%) had no knowledge of acupuncture, and 206 (67.6%) reported having pain. In multivariate analyses, non-Whites (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.94, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.06-3.56), and those with pain (AOR 2.52, CI 1.25-5.10) were more interested in using acupuncture. In addition, patients with preexisting knowledge about acupuncture were also more likely to use acupuncture than those without this knowledge (AOR 2.23, CI 1.28-3.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients of non-White race, those with pain or those with prior knowledge about acupuncture were more willing to utilize acupuncture during RT. Since half of the patients had no knowledge about acupuncture, interventions to improve patients' knowledge are needed to facilitate the successful integration of acupuncture into cancer care.

Aprepitant reduces chemotherapy-induced vomiting in children and young adults with brain tumors

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are common and distressing side effects in patients with brain tumors and may be associated with radiation and the administration of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Pediatric antiemetic guidelines recommend administration of a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5HT3) receptor antagonists and the addition of aprepitant, a neurokinin 1 (NK1) antagonist with corticosteroids for the treatment of HEC. However, challenges persist in treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with brain tumors as corticosteroids are contraindicated due to potential impairment of the blood-brain barrier permeability. The objective was to determine whether a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and the addition of aprepitant, an NK1 antagonist without a corticosteroid, were effective in reducing HEC vomiting in pediatric brain tumor patients.

METHOD

A retrospective review found that 18 patients with a history of high-grade vomiting during radiation were prescribed a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and aprepitant without a corticosteroid during their first course of HEC. To determine the efficacy of aprepitant without a corticosteroid, each recipient was matched with 2 controls who did not receiv aprepitant.

RESULTS

During HEC, controls without aprepitant were more likely to have Grade 2 or higher vomiting than the aprepitant recipients (P = .03; odds ratio = 4.15; 95% confidence interval = 1.59-10.82), after controlling for radiation-associated vomiting toxicity.

DISCUSSION

Significantly less vomiting was identified in children receiving HEC and prescribed a 5HT3 receptor antagonist and aprepitant. Findings suggest that the addition of an NK1 antagonist may be beneficial to emetic control in this highly vulnerable population.

Radiation induced nausea and vomiting

Radiation induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) is a frequent complication of radiotherapy and still often underestimated by radiation oncologists. Fractionated RT may involve up to 40 fractions over a 6-8 weeks period, and prolonged symptoms of nausea and vomiting affect quality of life. Approximately, 50-80 percent of patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) will experience these symptoms if no appropriate prophylaxis is applied. The incidence and severity are influenced by the specific RT regimen and by patient-specific factors. Patients should receive antiemetic prophylaxis as suggested by the international antiemetic guidelines based upon a risk assessment, taking especially into account the planned radiotherapy regimen. In this field the guideline from the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Clinical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Medical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines are wildly endorsed. The emetogenicity of radiotherapy regimens and recommendations for the appropriate use of antiemetics including 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) receptor antagonists and steroids will be discussed in regard to the applied radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy regimen.

Acupuncture compared with placebo acupuncture in radiotherapy-induced nausea--a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

It is not known if verum (real) acupuncture is effective for nausea and vomiting (emesis) during radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We randomly treated 215 blinded cancer patients with verum: penetrating 'deqi' creating acupuncture (n = 109) or non-penetrating sham needles (n = 106) two to three times per week. The patients documented emesis daily during the radiotherapy period. Primary end point was the number of patients with at least one episode of nausea.

RESULTS

In the verum and the sham acupuncture group, 70% and 62% experienced nausea at least once during the radiotherapy period (relative risk 1.1, 95% CI 0.9-1.4) for a mean number of 10.1 and 8.7 days. Twenty five percent and 28% vomited, and 42% and 37% used antiemetic drugs at least once, respectively. Ninety-five percent in the verum acupuncture group and 96% in the sham acupuncture group believed that the treatment had been effective against nausea. In both groups, 67% experienced positive effects on relaxation, mood, sleep or pain reduction and 89% wished to receive the treatment again.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture creating deqi is not more effective than sham in radiotherapy-induced nausea, but in this study, nearly all patients in both groups experienced that the treatment was effective for nausea.

New Considerations in the Design of Clinical Trials for Bone Metastases

Palliative radiotherapy (RT) is prescribed to patients with bone metastases to alleviate symptoms and improve quality of life. The lack of consistent endpoints for such trials has made cross study comparison difficult and has led to contradictory conclusions. The International Bone Metastases Consensus Working Party was established to create a standard set of endpoints and recommendations for future clinical trials. Recommendations were included regarding eligibility criteria, pain assessments, follow-up assessments, timing, as well as radiation techniques. Suggestions were also made to facilitate the ease with which different studies could be compared as well as to encourage widespread consistency in certain aspects of trial design. Investigators conducting clinical trials in bone metastases should continue to adopt these recommendations to ensure consistent guidelines based on the most recent literature.

Prophylaxis of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the palliative treatment of bone metastases

PURPOSE

To document the incidence and timing of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) in the treatment of bone metastases among patients receiving prophylaxis with a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist.

METHODS

Patients receiving single (SF) or multiple fraction (MF) palliative radiotherapy (RT) of moderate or low emetogenic risk for bone metastases were prescribed prophylactic Ondansetron. The frequency and duration of prophylaxis and the use of rescue antiemetics were left to the discretion of the treating physicians. Patients documented episodes of nausea (N) and vomiting (V) in daily diaries before and during RT, and until 10 days following RT completion. Rates of complete prophylaxis (CP) for N&V, respectively (CP = no event and no rescue medication), were calculated for the acute phase (the period from the start of RT to the first day following RT completion inclusive) and the delayed phase (the second to tenth days following RT completion inclusive).

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were enrolled, and 32 were evaluable. CP rates were as follows: moderate-risk SF group (n = 16), acute phase (CP for N = 56%, CP for V = 69%) and delayed phase (CP for N = 31%, CP for V = 44%); moderate-risk MF group (n = 7), acute phase (CP for N = 71%, CP for V = 57%) and delayed phase (CP for N = 43%, CP for V = 57%); low-risk SF group (n = 8), acute phase (CP for N = 50%, CP for V = 100%) and delayed phase (CP for N = 43%, CP for V = 57%); and low-risk MF group (n = 1), acute phase (CP for N = 100%, CP for V = 100%) and delayed phase (CP for N = 100%, CP for V = 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite prophylaxis, RINV was common among patients receiving palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases, especially during the delayed phase.

Pilot testing of methods for evaluation of acupuncture for emesis during radiotherapy: a randomised single subject experimental design

BACKGROUND

Many acupuncture studies are of weak methodological quality, possibly due to lack of pilot testing. This pilot study tested design features, including test of feasibility, compliance to treatment and data collection, level of blinding success and the patients' potential perceived effects of the treatment, in preparation for an efficacy study.

METHOD

A modified single subject experimental design was conducted. 10 cancer patients were randomised to verum penetrating acupuncture or non-penetrating sham needles for 30 min 2-3 times/week during radiotherapy over abdomen/pelvis. They answered test-retested emesis questions (r=0.527-1.0) covering nausea, vomiting, use of antiemetics, wellbeing and activities of daily living.

RESULTS

Overall, the patients completed 98% of the 345 emesis-questionnaire days and 101 of the 115 offered treatments. All patients believed they received verum acupuncture. 10 patients experienced antiemetic effects, seven relaxation, five pain-reduction and five experienced sleep improvement. Two types of nausea questions showed absolute concordance (r=1.0) (n of observations=456). Nausea was experienced by one of five verum acupuncture treated patients (duration median 0% of the radiotherapy-days) and four of five sham acupuncture treated patients (duration median 24% of the radiotherapy-days). Patients experiencing nausea rated decreased wellbeing and performance of daily activities compared to patients free from nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

All patients were blinded, complied with verum/sham treatments and data-collection, and believed they had effects of the received treatment. The methods for verum/sham treatment and data collection may thus be used in an adequately powered randomised controlled study of the effect of acupuncture for radiotherapy-induced emesis.

Getting the grip on nonspecific treatment effects: emesis in patients randomized to acupuncture or sham compared to patients receiving standard care

Background

It is not known whether or not delivering acupuncture triggers mechanisms cited as placebo and if acupuncture or sham reduces radiotherapy-induced emesis more than standard care.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Cancer patients receiving radiotherapy over abdominal/pelvic regions were randomized to verum (penetrating) acupuncture (n = 109; 99 provided data) in the alleged antiemetic acupuncture point PC6 or sham acupuncture (n = 106; 101 provided data) performed with a telescopic non-penetrating needle at a sham point 2–3 times/week during the whole radiotherapy period. The acupuncture cohort was compared to a reference cohort receiving standard care (n = 62; 62 provided data). The occurrence of emesis in each group was compared after a mean dose of 27 Gray. Nausea and vomiting were experienced during the preceding week by 37 and 8% in the verum acupuncture group, 38 and 7% in the sham acupuncture group and 63 and 15% in the standard care group, respectively. The lower occurrence of nausea in the acupuncture cohort (verum and sham) compared to patients receiving standard care (37% versus 63%, relative risk (RR) 0.6, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.5–0.8) was also true after adjustment for potential confounding factors for nausea (RR 0.8, CI 0.6 to 0.9). Nausea intensity was lower in the acupuncture cohort (78% no nausea, 13% a little, 8% moderate, 1% much) compared to the standard care cohort (52% no nausea, 32% a little, 15% moderate, 2% much) (p = 0.002). The acupuncture cohort expected antiemetic effects from their treatment (95%). Patients who expected nausea had increased risk for nausea compared to patients who expected low risk for nausea (RR 1.6; Cl 1.2–2.4).

Conclusions/Significance

Patients treated with verum or sham acupuncture experienced less nausea and vomiting compared to patients receiving standard care, possibly through a general care effect or due to the high level of patient expectancy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00621660

Factors associated with weight loss during radiotherapy in patients with stage I or II head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to identify factors associated with weight loss during radiotherapy (RT) in patients with stage I or II head and neck (HN) cancer.

METHODS

This study was conducted as part of a phase III chemoprevention trial. A total of 540 patients were randomized. The patients were weighed before and after RT. Patients' characteristics, dietary intake, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), tumor characteristic, treatment characteristics, and acute adverse effects of RT were evaluated at baseline and during RT. Factors independently associated with weight loss during RT were identified using the multiple linear regression (P ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

The mean weight loss during RT was 2.2 kg (standard deviation, 3.4). In bivariate analyses, the occurrence of adverse effects of RT and most of the HRQOL dimensions evaluated during RT were correlated with weight loss. In the multivariate analysis, eight factors were associated with a greater weight loss: all HN cancer sites other than the glottic larynx (P < 0.001), TNM stage II disease (P = 0.01), higher pre-RT body weight (P < 0.001), dysphagia before RT (P < 0.005), higher mucosa adverse effect of RT (P = 0.03), lower dietary energy intake during RT (P < 0.001), lower score of the digestive dimension on the Head and Neck Radiotherapy Questionnaire (P < 0.001) and a higher score of the constipation symptom on the EORTC QLQ-C30 during RT (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The results underline the importance of maintaining energy intake in early stage HN cancer patients during RT and the importance of preventing and treating adverse effects.

Patient- and treatment-related risk factors for nausea and emesis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the prevalence of acute nausea and emesis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with emphasis on the influence of patient- and treatment-related risk factors and prophylactic antiemetic medication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 335 patients treated with different intravenous standard chemoradiotherapy protocols in the inpatient setting were included in this retrospective study. Acute nausea and emesis, scored according to the CTC (version 3.0) criteria, were evaluated during 821 chemotherapy cycles. Side effects were correlated with patient-, tumor-, and treatment-related parameters.

RESULTS

Overall, at least one episode of acute nausea occurred in 48% of the patients and at least one episode of vomiting occurred in 25% of patients. The emetogenic level of the applied chemotherapy protocol was the most significant risk factor for developing nausea and emesis (p < 0.0001). The site of irradiation - namely the thorax (p = 0.0110) and head and neck (p = 0.0415) - was also confirmed as a risk factor. Patient-related parameters, e.g., female gender (p = 0.0003), young age (< 40 years; p = 0.0029), weight loss > 5% (p = 0.0004), and the presence of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG; p = 0.0071), were associated with higher rates of nausea and emesis, while a history of alcohol abuse showed a protective effect (p = 0.0553). In high emetogenic chemotherapy protocols, prophylaxis with 5-HT3 antagonist plus dexamethasone was superior to 5-HT3 antagonist alone (p = 0.0383).

CONCLUSION

Future studies should evaluate more effective prophylaxis protocols in CRT in order to reduce the high rates of nausea and emesis.