Current pharmacotherapy for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients

Electrical acupoint stimulation for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is the most common adverse effect of chemotherapy and affects the continuation of chemotherapy in cancer patients. Electrical acupoint stimulation (EAS), which includes electroacupuncture and transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TES), has been used to treat CINV. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EAS in the treatment of CINV.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of EAS for CINV retrieved form five key databases. Two researchers independently performed article screening, data extraction and data integration. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to assesse the methodological quality according to Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform analyses.

Results

10 RCTs with a total of 950 participants were included. The results showed that there was no significant difference between EAS compared to sham EAS in terms of increasing the rate of complete control of CINV and decreasing the overall incidence of CINV [RR = 1.26, 95 % CI (0.96, 1.66), P = 0.95; RR = 1.16, 95 % CI (0.97, 1.40), p = 0.71]. In terms of CINV severity, EAS reduced the occurrence of moderate-to-severe CINV [RR = 0.60, 95 % CI (0.38, 0.94), P = 0.03; RR = 0.50, 95 % CI (0.33, 0.76), P = 0.001].

Conclusion

EAS could improve moderate-to-severe CINV. However, EAS did not show a significant difference in reducing overall incidence and improving complete control rates compared with sham EAS. Due to limitations in the quality of the included articles, the available studies are insufficient to have sufficient evidence to confirm the efficacy of EAS for CINV. Validation with rigorously designed, large-sample, high-quality clinical trial studies may also be needed.

Outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis among pediatric cancer patients receiving moderate to highly emetogenic chemotherapy at pediatric hemato-oncology ward of Tikur Anbessa specialized hospital: A prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major issue for chemotherapy pediatric patients, especially in developing countries due to limited access to essential antiemetics. This study aimed to assess antiemetic prophylaxis outcomes in pediatric cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

A longitudinal prospective observational study design was conducted among 201 pediatric cancer patients followed up to 120 h post-chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The majority of patients (75.1%) received combination prophylactic antiemetics in the acute phase. Complete response (CR) was the highest in the acute phase (71.1%). Emesis episodes occurred most frequently on the first day of treatment (28.4%) and gradually decreased over time. History of motion sickness, platinum-based chemotherapy, and prior chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) were associated with emesis during the acute phase whereas multiple-day chemotherapy, prior CIV, receipt of antiemetics, and a history of motion sickness in the delayed phase. However, the odds of CIV were reduced with steroid presence in the chemotherapy regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of participants could not achieve a CR. It is important for clinicians to be cognizant of risk factors that influence the outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis to achieve better control of CINV among pediatric cancer patients.

Effects of aromatherapy on nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

and purpose: Aromatherapy offers a low-risk solution for effectively managing common nausea and vomiting in cancer patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess its impact on these symptoms to facilitate practical guidelines establishment.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase were searched for articles published until April 30, 2023. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of aromatherapy on nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer (age ≥18 years). The effect size was calculated using standardized mean differences (SMDs) with a random effects model. Subgroup analyses, meta-analysis of variance, and meta-regression were performed using the "meta" package in R version 4.0.2. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were performed; two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool 2.0.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs across 10 articles revealed that aromatherapy reduced overall nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer with significant efficacy (SMD = -0.81, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: -1.11 to -0.52). Furthermore, aromatherapy reduced nausea (SMD = -0.85, 95 % CI: -1.23 to -0.46) and combined nausea and vomiting (SMD = -1.08, 95 % CI: -1.68 to -0.47), but not vomiting alone (SMD = -0.24, 95 % CI: -1.03 to 0.55). Inhalation and massage yielded positive results, especially in chemotherapy-induced cases; peppermint oil was particularly successful.

CONCLUSION

Our findings underscore aromatherapy's value in managing cancer treatment-associated nausea and vomiting. Conclusive evidence on aromatherapy-led nausea reduction is lacking due to limited RCTs; research is warranted for robust conclusions.

The clinical effect of an electric massage chair on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients: randomized phase II cross-over trial

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse events in cancer patients and can negatively affect their quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of an electric massage chair (EMC) for the treatment of CINV.

METHODS

A randomized phase II cross-over trial was conducted on solid cancer patients who received moderate (MEC) to high emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). The participants were randomly assigned to receive their first chemotherapy either on a standard bed (Group A) or in an EMC (Group B) during the infusion. The patients were then crossed over to the next cycle. CINV and QoL questionnaires were collected from the participants.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients completed the trial protocol and were included in the analysis, with 29 and 30 patients in Groups A and B, respectively. The mean INVR (Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching) score in the 2nd day of the first cycle was higher in Group B (3.63 ± 5.35) than Group A (2.76 ± 4.78), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.5367). The complete response rate showed little difference between the groups. Among the high-emetic risk subgroups, patients who received HEC (p = 0.04595), younger patients (p = 0.0108), and non-colorectal cancer patients (p = 0.0495) presented significantly lower CINV scores when EMC was applied.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there was no significant difference in INVR scores between standard care and EMC. Applying EMC at the first chemotherapy infusion may help preserve QoL and reduce CINV in high-risk patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

KCT0008200, 17/02/2023, Retrospectively registered.

Cannabinoids in the treatment of glioblastoma

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most prevalent primary malignant tumor of the nervous system. While the treatment of other neoplasms is increasingly more efficacious the median survival rate of GBM patients remains low and equals about 14 months. Due to this fact, there are intensive efforts to find drugs that would help combat GBM. Nowadays cannabinoids are becoming more and more important in the field of cancer and not only because of their properties of antiemetic drugs during chemotherapy. These compounds may have a direct cytotoxic effect on cancer cells. Studies indicate GBM has disturbances in the endocannabinoid system-changes in cannabinoid metabolism as well as in the cannabinoid receptor expression. The GBM cells show expression of cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 (CB1R and CB2R), which mediate various actions of cannabinoids. Through these receptors, cannabinoids inhibit the proliferation and invasion of GBM cells, along with changing their morphology. Cannabinoids also induce an intrinsic pathway of apoptosis in the tumor. Hence the use of cannabinoids in the treatment of GBM may be beneficial to the patients. So far, studies focusing on using cannabinoids in GBM therapy are mainly preclinical and involve cell lines and mice. The results are promising and show cannabinoids inhibit GBM growth. Several clinical studies are also being carried out. The preliminary results show good tolerance of cannabinoids and prolonged survival after administration of these drugs. In this review, we describe the impact of cannabinoids on GBM and glioma cells in vitro and in animal studies. We also provide overview of clinical trials on using cannabinoids in the treatment of GBM.

A phase II trial of netupitant/palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting in patients receiving BEAM prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) patients receiving BEAM therapy. Study Design: This phase II, prospective, intention-to-treat, single-center, single-arm study involved 43 adult patients who received NEPA and dexamethasone for the prevention of CINV due to BEAM conditioning chemotherapy. An interim analysis, performed after 13 patients, determined utility versus futility, and supported continuation to full enrollment. Descriptive statistics were used to report complete response (CR), complete protection, incidence of emesis, and administration of rescue agents. A Kaplan-Meier curve depicted time to first emesis and first rescue medication. Patients self-reported levels of daily nausea descriptively via a CINV Questionnaire. Results: By study end, 13 of 43 patients achieved a CR with an average of 10.6 emesis-free days (SD 0.95) over the 11-day observation period, with no emetic events in any patient during the acute/chemotherapy phase. Nausea was well-controlled throughout the acute therapy phase (Day 1-6) and increased during the delayed phase (Day 7-11) with a peak mean level of 2.79/10 at Day 10. Aside from lower grade (≤2), headaches, constipation, and diarrhea were the most widely reported adverse effects. Conclusion: The combination of NEPA and dexamethasone is safe and effective for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving BEAM conditioning therapy prior to HCT. The regimen demonstrated greater effectiveness in the acute phase versus the delayed phase, with low levels of nausea throughout the study period and complete emesis prevention during chemotherapy.

Bifidobacterium longum SX-1326 ameliorates gastrointestinal toxicity after irinotecan chemotherapy via modulating the P53 signaling pathway and brain-gut axis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent malignant malignancy affecting the gastrointestinal tract that is usually treated clinically with chemotherapeutic agents, whereas chemotherapeutic agents can cause severe gastrointestinal toxicity, which brings great pain to patients. Therefore, finding effective adjuvant agents for chemotherapy is crucial.

METHODS

In this study, a CRC mouse model was successfully constructed using AOM/DSS, and the treatment was carried out by probiotic Bifidobacterium longum SX-1326 (B. longum SX-1326) in combination with irinotecan. Combining with various techniques of modern biomedical research, such as Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E), Immunohistochemistry (IHC), Western blotting and 16S rDNA sequencing, we intend to elucidate the effect and mechanism of B. longum SX-1326 in improving the anticancer efficacy and reducing the side effects on the different levels of molecules, animals, and bacteria.

RESULTS

Our results showed that B. longum SX-1326 enhanced the expression of Cleaved Caspase-3 (M vs. U = p < 0.01) and down-regulated the expression level of B-cell lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2) through up-regulation of the p53 signaling pathway in CRC mice, which resulted in an adjuvant effect on the treatment of CRC with irinotecan. Moreover, B. longum SX-1326 was also able to regulate the gut-brain-axis (GBA) by restoring damaged enterochromaffin cells, reducing the release of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in brain tissue (I vs. U = 89.26 vs. 75.03, p < 0.05), and further alleviating the adverse effects of nausea and vomiting. In addition, B. longum SX-1326 reversed dysbiosis in CRC model mice by increasing the levels of Dehalobacterium, Ruminnococcus, and Mucispirillum. And further alleviated colorectal inflammation by downregulating the TLR4/MyD88/NF-κB signaling pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our work reveals that B. longum SX-1326 has a favorable effect in adjuvant irinotecan for CRC and amelioration of post-chemotherapy side effects, and also provides the theoretical basis and data for finding a safe and efficient chemotherapeutic adjuvant.

The efficacy and safety of ketamine for depression in patients with cancer: A systematic review

Background

Management of depression in the oncology population includes supportive psychotherapeutic interventions with or without psychotropic medication, which take time to demonstrate effectiveness. Fast-acting interventions, like ketamine, can provide a rapid antidepressant effect; however, there has been limited research on effects of ketamine among cancer patients. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of research on the efficacy and safety of ketamine on depression in patients with cancer.

Methods

We reviewed the published literature in MEDLINE® (via PubMed®), EMBASE, and Scopus from 1 January 1982 to 20 October 2022. We screened the retrieved abstracts against inclusion criteria and conducted a full-text review of eligible studies. Following extraction of data from included studies, we used a framework analysis approach to summarize the evidence on using ketamine in patients with cancer.

Results

All 5 included studies were randomized clinical trials conducted in inpatient settings in China. In all included studies ketamine was administered intravenously. Three studies used only racemic ketamine, and two studies used both S-ketamine and racemic ketamine. All included studies reported ketamine a tolerable and effective drug to control depression symptoms.

Conclusion

Included studies showed administration of sub-anesthesia ketamine significantly improves postoperative depression among patients with cancer.

Efficacy of press needle treatment in reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea, vomiting, and retching gastrointestinal cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and retching often pose challenges in managing patients with gastrointestinal cancer. This randomized controlled trial sought to evaluate the effectiveness of press needle therapy in mitigating CINV and retching following chemotherapy.

Methods

Two hundred patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy were randomly assigned to either the press needle group or the control group. The control group received 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) antagonists and dexamethasone 30 min before chemotherapy, followed by dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 after chemotherapy. In contrast, the press needle group received press needle treatment 30 min prior to chemotherapy. The primary outcome was the Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching (INVR), assessed at seven time points: before chemotherapy and at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 h post-chemotherapy.

Results

All patients completed their respective treatments, and no significant adverse effects related to press needle treatment (such as skin allergies, acupoint infections, headaches, or dizziness) were reported. A two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant differences in INVR scores between the two groups (P < 0.05). Further analysis with a t-test indicated that INVR scores in the press needle treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group at 12, 24, and 36 hours after chemotherapy (P < 0.05), with no significant difference observed thereafter.

Conclusions

Press needle treatment effectively alleviated nausea, vomiting, and retching in patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy. It represents a safe, efficient, and convenient complement to preventive treatment with 5-HT3 antagonists.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR1900024554).

Pinellia ternata-containing traditional Chinese medicine combined with 5-HT3RAs for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 RCTs

BACKGROUND

Pinellia ternata (P. ternata, Banxia)-containing traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in China as an adjuvant treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). However, evidence of its efficacy and safety remains limited.

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) in the treatment of CINV.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

All relevant RCTs were systematically retrieved from seven internet databases (up to February 10, 2023). P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs to treat CINV was included in all RCTs. The clinical effective rate (CER) was defined as the primary outcome, while appetite, quality of life (QOL), and side effects were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 22 RCTs with 1,787 patients. Our results indicated that P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs significantly improved the CER of CINV (RR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.37-1.57, p < 0.00001), appetite (RR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.42-2.20, p < 0.00001), QOL (RR = 7.67, 95% CI = 1.56-13.78, p = 0.01), the CER of several 5-HT3RA medications (RR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.37-1.57, p < 0.00001), and acute and delayed vomiting (RR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.12-1.36, p < 0.0001) compared with the 5-HT3RAs alone, while the combination therapy decreased the incidence of side effects induced by 5-HT3RAs for CINV (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.42-0.59, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis, P. ternata-containing TCM combined with 5-HT3RAs was safer and more effective than 5-HT3RAs alone for CINV patients. However, due to the limitations of the included studies, more high-quality clinical trials are required to further validate our findings.

Genetic and environmental influences on one-trial conditioned context aversion in mice

Anticipatory nausea (AN) is caused by an association between contextual cues and the experience of nausea (the side effects of chemotherapy or radiation treatment) and it develops predominantly in female patients undergoing chemotherapy. Preclinical studies in rodents show that the administration of an illness-inducing agent in the presence of novel contextual cues can cause conditioned context aversion (CCA) and this has been proposed to model AN. The literature also suggests that brief pre-exposure to a novel context prior to shock delivery is critical in the development of contextual fear conditioning in rodents (a phenomenon known as Immediate Shock Deficit), but this has not been assessed in CCA. The aim of present study was to develop a CCA paradigm to assess this in outbred (CD1) and inbred (C57BL/6J) mice and evaluate potential sex differences. The results revealed that a single conditioning trial in which a distinctive context was paired with LiCl-induced illness was sufficient to elicit a conditioned response in both female and male CD1 outbred mice, but not in C57BL/6J inbred mice. In addition, CCA was facilitated when animals had prior experience with the context. Finally, outbred female mice showed longer and more robust retention of CCA than male mice, which parallels clinical findings. The results indicate the importance of using CD1 outbred mice as an animal model of AN as well as examining sex differences in the CCA paradigm. Similar findings in humans encourage the future use of this novel CCA preclinical mouse model.

Link between Blood Cell-Associated Inflammatory Indices and Chemotherapy-Induced Hyperglycemia in Women Affected with Breast Cancer: Clinical Studies

Krishna PrasadBackground  Development of treatment-induced hyperglycemia/diabetes is a considerable problem in women undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer. In this study, baseline levels of blood cell-associated inflammatory indices (BCAII) were analyzed to understand their role in the development of treatment-induced hyperglycemia and diabetogenesis. Materials and Methods  This was a retrospective study, and information on women who were normoglycemic and nondiabetic and of women who were diabetic at the beginning of the treatment were collected from files. Demographic, pathology-related details, and complete blood profile were noted. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and systemic inflammatory index (SII) which indicate BCAII were calculated. Demographic details were subjected to frequency and percentage, while blood parameters were subjected to one-way analysis of variance followed by post hoc Bonferroni's multiple comparison tests. A p -value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results  The results indicated that a significant difference in levels of total count ( p  < 0.035), neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelets ( p  < 0.001) were observed. Regarding BCAII, when compared with women who were normoglycemic at the end of treatment, NLR, dNLR, PLR, and SII were significantly high for people who were known diabetics at the beginning of treatment ( p  < 0.001). The dNLR ( p  = 0.0008), PLR ( p  < 0.001), and SII ( p  < 0.001) were significant for people who developed secondary hyperglycemia/diabetes, while only dNLR was significant for people who progressed from normal to prediabetes stage ( p  = 0.049) Conclusion  To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study that indicates difference in baseline BCAII and development of treatment-induced hyperglycemia/diabetes indicating that underlying low levels of inflammation may contribute to diabetogenesis in women affected with breast cancer.

Potential, Limitations and Risks of Cannabis-Derived Products in Cancer Treatment

The application of cannabis products in oncology receives interest, especially from patients. Despite the plethora of research data available, the added value in curative or palliative cancer care and the possible risks involved are insufficiently proven and therefore a matter of debate. We aim to give a recommendation on the position of cannabis products in clinical oncology by assessing recent literature. Various types of cannabis products, characteristics, quality and pharmacology are discussed. Standardisation is essential for reliable and reproducible quality. The oromucosal/sublingual route of administration is preferred over inhalation and drinking tea. Cannabinoids may inhibit efflux transporters and drug-metabolising enzymes, possibly inducing pharmacokinetic interactions with anticancer drugs being substrates for these proteins. This may enhance the cytostatic effect and/or drug-related adverse effects. Reversely, it may enable dose reduction. Similar interactions are likely with drugs used for symptom management treating pain, nausea, vomiting and anorexia. Cannabis products are usually well tolerated and may improve the quality of life of patients with cancer (although not unambiguously proven). The combination with immunotherapy seems undesirable because of the immunosuppressive action of cannabinoids. Further clinical research is warranted to scientifically support (refraining from) using cannabis products in patients with cancer.

Cisplatin-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Effect of Herbal Medicines

Cisplatin is a chemotherapeutic agent that is widely used to treat various types of cancers. However, its side effects, most commonly nausea and vomiting, limit its widespread use. Although various drugs, such as ondansetron and aprepitant, are used to alleviate these side effects, their efficacy is still debated. This review aims to summarize the results of 14 studies on the effects of seven single herbal extracts, one multiple herbal extract, and one ginger sub-component (i.e., [6]-gingerol) on cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. The results of the included studies were subdivided into four categories: kaolin consumption, retching and vomiting, food intake, and weight loss. Most studies used rodents, whereas four studies used minks or pigeons. The doses of cisplatin used in the studies varied from 3 mg/kg to 7.5 mg/kg, and only a single injection was used. Nine studies analyzed the mechanisms of action of herbal medicines and assessed the involvement of neurotransmitters, cytokines, enzymes, and various hematological parameters. Although further research is needed, this review suggests herbal medicine as a viable treatment option for cisplatin-induced neuropathic pain.

Megestrol acetate dispersible tablets with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone vs. 5-HT3 receptor antagonist plus dexamethasone, can better control chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a randomized controlled study

Background

A reasonable and effective control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) plays an important role in the comprehensive treatment of cancer. Megestrol belongs to the 17α-hydroxyprogesterone derivative and is a highly effective synthetic progesterone. Recorded in the instructions may improve appetite and cachexia in patients with advanced tumors. In recent years, clinical practice and small sample studies have shown that megestrol combined with chemotherapy can improve CINV. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of megestrol acetate combined with a 5-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) receptor antagonist and dexamethasone in patients with CINV.

Methods

Patients with malignant tumors who were treated with cisplatin-containing chemotherapy in our hospital from September 2018 to December 2019 were enrolled. A total of 120 patients were selected and randomly assigned to receive either megestrol acetate dispersible tablets with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone (megestrol group) or a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist plus dexamethasone (control group). Megestrol acetate dispersible tablets: 160 mg orally every morning from the day of chemotherapy until it lasts for ten days. Abstract IV of the quality-of-life scale for cancer patients in China was used to assess the quality of life (QOL) of the participants. All adverse reactions during chemotherapy were assessed according to the CTCAE 4.03 evaluation standard issued by the National Cancer Institute and divided into five grades according to severity.

Results

For the control of nausea, the rates of complete prevention were significantly higher in the megestrol group than in the control patients during the delayed [53.3% (31/60) vs. 30.0% (18/60), P=0.012] and overall [40.0% (24/60) vs. 15.0% (9/60), P=0.002] observation periods. Moreover, the megestrol combination treatment group also achieved markedly higher rates of complete remission of vomiting than the control group during the delayed observation period [76.7% (46/60) vs. 51.7% (31/60), P=0.001], achieving an overall higher proportion of remission during the study period [68.3% (41/60) vs. 46.6% (28/60), P=0.0016].

Conclusions

The triple antiemetic protocol using megestrol acetate with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist plus dexamethasone can improve CINV symptoms caused by highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) with cisplatin, with an excellent control effect and few adverse reactions, especially for delayed CINV.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1800017953.

Efficacy and Safety of Ginger on the Side Effects of Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the world, with breast cancer being the most prevalent cancer. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most serious side effects of chemotherapy. Because the current CINV treatment option has several flaws, alternative treatment options are required. Ginger has traditionally been used to treat nausea and vomiting, and it also has anticancer properties in breast cancer cells. Based on these findings, researchers investigated whether using ginger to treat CINV in breast cancer patients is both effective and safe. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang from inception to June 2022. Outcomes included Rhodes Index Scores of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching, severity and frequency of CINV. Five RCTs were included. We pooled all included data and performed subgroup analysis by types of CINV. Overall, authors found that ginger was associated with a reduction in CINV. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis revealed that managing severity of acute CINV in breast cancer patients with ginger was efficient. In terms of managing delayed CINV in breast cancer patients, ginger was also statistically significant. The authors concluded that ginger may be helpful in lowering both acute and delayed CINV in breast cancer patients. Since there were no serious side effects, ginger is thought to be safe.

Liujunanwei decoction attenuates cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in a Rat-Pica model partially mediated by modulating the gut micsrobiome

Studies show that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), such as Liujunanwei (LJAW) decoction, can play important roles in alleviating side effects of chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to understand how LJAW can counter chemotherapy-induced emesis via alteration of gut microbiota. We evaluated the effect of LJAW on cisplatin (DDP)-induced nausea and vomiting using a rat-pica model. Rats react to emetic-producing stimuli with increased kaolin consumption, a phenomenon called pica. The rats were injected with cisplatin and then randomly assigned to the control (DDP), Ondansetron or LJAW. The intake of kaolin and chow diet as well as body weights were recorded every 24 hours. Fecal samples were collected prior to, after three and seven days of treatment. The expression of proteins was measured by western blot. The concentration of cytokines and serotonin was evaluated using ELISA assay kits. Kaolin consumption in rats induced by cisplatin was reduced by 16.5%, 22.5%, and 30.1% in the LJAW group compared to the DDP group at 24 hours, 48 hours and 72 hours, respectively (p&gt;0.05). LJAW significantly increased the food intake of the rats (13.94 ± 4.73 g) during the first 24 hours as opposed to the DDP (9.23 ± 3.77 g) (p&lt;0.05). 16S rRNA gene sequencing showed the abundance of Bacteroidetes increased in cisplatin treated rats. In addition, cisplatin injection caused an enrichment of Escherichia-Shigella and Enterococcus at the genus level. While, enrichment of Blautia and Lactobacillus was presented in LJAW treated rats. Serotonin decreased in LJAW treated intestine and medulla oblongata tissues. Further, the protein expression of tryptophan hydroxylase 1 (TPH1) a rate limiting enzyme of serotonin was inhibited in LJAW treated rat’s jejunum compared with cisplatin only treated rats. In addition, LJAW downregulated chemotherapy induced elevated inflammation. The results of this study indicated that LJAW is capable of decreasing cisplatin-induced kaolin intake in rat-nausea model (pica), which might be mediated through gut microbiome-induced anti-inflammation and anti-serotonin synthesis functions.

Evidence for Bell-Shaped Dose-Response Emetic Effects of Temsirolimus and Analogs: The Broad-Spectrum Antiemetic Efficacy of a Large Dose of Temsirolimus Against Diverse Emetogens in the Least Shrew (Cryptotis parva)

Temsirolimus is a prodrug form of sirolimus (rapamycin). With its analogs (everolimus, ridaforolimus, and rapamycin), it forms a group of anticancer agents that block the activity of one of the two mammalian targets of rapamycin (mTOR) complexes, mTORC1. We investigated the emetic potential of varying doses (0, 0.5, 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, and 40 mg/kg, i.p.) of temsirolimus in the least shrew. Temsirolimus caused a bell-shaped and dose-dependent increase in both the mean vomit frequency and the number of shrews vomiting with maximal efficacy at 10 mg/kg (p < 0.05 and p < 0.02, respectively). Its larger doses (20 or 40 mg/kg) had no significant emetic effect. We also evaluated the emetic potential of its analogs (5, 10, and 20 mg/kg, i.p.), all of which exhibited a similar emetic profile. Our observational studies indicated that temsirolimus can reduce the shrew motor activity at 40 mg/kg, and subsequently, we examined the motor effects of its lower doses. At 10 and 20 mg/kg, it did not affect the spontaneous locomotor activity (distance moved) but attenuated the mean rearing frequency in a U-shaped manner at 10 mg/kg (p < 0.05). We then determined the broad-spectrum antiemetic potential of a 20 mg/kg (i.p.) dose of temsirolimus against diverse emetogens, including selective and nonselective agonists of 1) dopaminergic D2/3 receptors (apomorphine and quinpirole); 2) serotonergic 5-HT3 receptors [5-HT (serotonin) and 2-methyl-5-HT]; 3) cholinergic M1 receptors (pilocarpine and McN-A-343); 4) substance P neurokinin NK1 receptors (GR73632); 5) the L-type calcium (Ca2+) channel (LTCC) (FPL64176); 6) the sarcoplasmic endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase inhibitor, thapsigargin; 7) the CB1 receptor inverse agonist/antagonist, SR141716A; and 8) the chemotherapeutic cisplatin. Temsirolimus prevented vomiting evoked by the aforementioned emetogens with varying degrees. The mechanisms underlying the pro- and antiemetic effects of temsirolimus evaluated by immunochemistry for c-fos expression demonstrated a c-fos induction in the AP and NTS, but not DMNX with the 10 mg/kg emetic dose of temsirolimus, whereas its larger antiemetic dose (20 mg/kg) had no significant effect. Our study is the first to provide preclinical evidence demonstrating the promising antiemetic potential of high doses of temsirolimus and possibly its analogs in least shrews.

Metagenomics and chemotherapy-induced nausea: A roadmap for future research

Uncontrolled chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting can reduce patients' quality of life and may result in premature discontinuation of chemotherapy. Although nausea and vomiting are commonly grouped together, research has shown that antiemetics are clinically effective against chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) but less so against chemotherapy-induced nausea (CIN). Nausea remains a problem for up to 68% of patients who are prescribed guideline-consistent antiemetics. Despite the high prevalence of CIN, relatively little is known regarding its etiology independent of CIV. This review summarizes a metagenomics approach to the study and treatment of CIN with the goal of encouraging future research. Metagenomics focuses on genetic risk factors and encompasses both human (ie, host) and gut microbial genetic variation. Little work to date has focused on metagenomics as a putative biological mechanism of CIN. Metagenomics has the potential to be a powerful tool in advancing scientific understanding of CIN by identifying new biological pathways and intervention targets. The investigation of metagenomics in the context of well-established demographic, clinical, and patient-reported risk factors may help to identify patients at risk and facilitate the prevention and management of CIN.

Olanzapine enhances the effect of conventional drugs in chemotherapy inducing nausea and vomiting: A randomized clinical trial

Background

Chemotherapy inducing nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the significant side effects of anti-cancer treatment, and its full prevention is a potential challenge. This study was done to specify the effect of olanzapine in this setting.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, clinical trial study, olanzapine was compared with a placebo in combination with dexamethasone and granisetrone in patients with cancer. Patients in the intervention group received dexamethasone , granisetron and olanzapine. Patients in the control group received a placebo instead of olanzapine. Overall, acute nausea and vomiting prevention were the primary and secondary end points; complete response (no nausea,no vomiting) in the delayed period of chemotherapy was the third end point. Response to treatment was evaluated by the Functional Living Index Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire completion in the first, the third and the fifth of chemotherapy.

Results

Percentage reduction in mean±SD nausea and vomiting in the overall phase (0-120 hours) of intervention group compared to the control group respectively were 29.94±2.06, 69.75±2.32 [(57.93% reduction (p<0.001)]. For the acute phase (0-24 hours) were 26.08±2.36, 51.85±2.24 [(47.21% reduction (p<0.001)], for the delayed phase (24-120 hours), were 31.26±2.57, 67.91±2.12 ,[(55.11% reduction;(p<0.001)] respectively.

Conclusion

Olanzapine, along with dexamethasone and granisetron, significantly reduced vomiting and nausea in patients undergoing chemotherapy. No adverse event of olanzapine was observed in the patients.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of NEPA, a fixed-dose combination of netupitant and palonosetron, for the prevention of highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: an international perspective

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of NEPA, a fixed-dose combination of oral netupitant (300 mg) and palonosetron (0.5 mg), compared to available treatments in Spain after aprepitant generic introduction in the market, and to discuss results in previously performed analyses in different wordwide settings.

METHODS

A Markov model including three health states, complete protection, complete response at best and incomplete response, was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NEPA versus common treatment options in Spain during 5 days after chemotherapy. Incremental costs including treatment costs and treatment failure management cost as well as incremental effects including quality adjusted life days (QALDs) and emesis-free days were compared between NEPA and the comparator arms. The primary outcomes were cost per avoided emetic event and cost per QALDs gained.

RESULTS

NEPA was dominant (more effective and less costly) against aprepitant combined with palonosetron, and fosaprepitant combined with granisetron, while, compared to generic aprepitant plus ondansetron, NEPA showed an incremental cost per avoided emetic event of €33 and cost per QALD gained of €125.

CONCLUSION

By most evaluations, NEPA is a dominant or cost-effective treatment alternative to current antiemetic standards of care in Spain during the first 5 days of chemotherapy treatment in cancer patients, despite the introduction of generics. These results are in line with previously reported analyses throughout different international settings.

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BACKGROUND

Granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).

CONCLUSION

The use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.

Antiemetics for adults for prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

About 70% to 80% of adults with cancer experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). CINV remains one of the most distressing symptoms associated with cancer therapy and is associated with decreased adherence to chemotherapy. Combining 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists with corticosteroids or additionally with neurokinin-1 (NK₁) receptor antagonists is effective in preventing CINV among adults receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Various treatment options are available, but direct head-to-head comparisons do not allow comparison of all treatments versus another.  OBJECTIVES: • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving HEC - To compare the effects of antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids on prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in network meta-analysis (NMA) - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving MEC - To compare whether antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids are superior for prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting to treatment combinations including 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists and corticosteroids solely, in network meta-analysis - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings, and study registries from 1988 to February 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs including adults with any cancer receiving HEC or MEC (according to the latest definition) and comparing combination therapies of NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors and corticosteroids for prevention of CINV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We expressed treatment effects as risk ratios (RRs). Prioritised outcomes were complete control of vomiting during delayed and overall phases, complete control of nausea during the overall phase, quality of life, serious adverse events (SAEs), and on-study mortality. We assessed GRADE and developed 12 'Summary of findings' tables. We report results of most crucial outcomes in the abstract, that is, complete control of vomiting during the overall phase and SAEs. For a comprehensive illustration of results, we randomly chose aprepitant plus granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for HEC, and granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for MEC.

MAIN RESULTS

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) We included 73 studies reporting on 25,275 participants and comparing 14 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 704 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (39 RCTs, 21,642 participants; 12 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron for completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): fosnetupitant + palonosetron (810 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.37; moderate certainty), aprepitant + palonosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.98  to 1.18; low-certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21; low certainty), and fosaprepitant + palonosetron (746 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19; low certainty).  Netupitant + palonosetron (704 of 1000; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; high-certainty) and fosaprepitant + granisetron (697 of 1000; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06; high-certainty) have little to no impact on complete control of vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant + ondansetron (676 of 1000; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.05; low certainty), fosaprepitant + ondansetron (662 of 1000; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.04; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (634 of 1000; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; low certainty), rolapitant + granisetron (627 of 1000; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01; moderate certainty), and rolapitant + ondansetron (598 of 1000; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.12; low certainty). We could not include two treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 35 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (23 RCTs, 16,065 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that fewer participants may experience SAEs when treated with the following drug combinations than with aprepitant + granisetron: fosaprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.07; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.39; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (9 of 1000; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.58; low certainty), fosaprepitant + granisetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.50; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (20 of 1000; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.70; low certainty). Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of aprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.14; very low certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (11 of 1000; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.90; very low certainty), fosaprepitant + palonosetron (12 of 1000; RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.95; very low certainty), fosnetupitant + palonosetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.16; very low certainty), and aprepitant + palonosetron (17 of 1000; RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.05 to 4.78; very low certainty) on the risk of SAEs when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  We could not include three treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron, rolapitant + ondansetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) We included 38 studies reporting on 12,038 participants and comparing 15 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors, or 5-HT₃ inhibitors solely. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 555 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with granisetron. Evidence from NMA (22 RCTs, 7800 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): aprepitant + palonosetron (716 of 1000; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.66; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (694 of 1000; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.70; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (660 of 1000; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.33; high certainty).  Palonosetron (588 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) and aprepitant + granisetron (577 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) may or may not increase complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron, respectively. Azasetron (560 of 1000; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.34; low certainty) may result in little to no difference in complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron. Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): fosaprepitant + ondansetron (500 of 100; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22; low certainty), aprepitant + ondansetron (477 of 1000; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.17; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (461 of 1000; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.12; low certainty), and ondansetron (433 of 1000; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty). We could not include five treatment combinations (fosaprepitant + granisetron, azasetron, dolasetron, ramosetron, tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 153 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with granisetron. Evidence from pair-wise comparison (1 RCT, 1344 participants) suggests that more participants may experience SAEs when treated with rolapitant + granisetron (176 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.50; low certainty). NMA was not feasible for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Certainty of evidence Our main reason for downgrading was serious or very serious imprecision (e.g. due to wide 95% CIs crossing or including unity, few events leading to wide 95% CIs, or small information size). Additional reasons for downgrading some comparisons or whole networks were serious study limitations due to high risk of bias or moderate inconsistency within networks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This field of supportive cancer care is very well researched. However, new drugs or drug combinations are continuously emerging and need to be systematically researched and assessed. For people receiving HEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest one superior treatment for prevention and control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.  For people receiving MEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest superiority for treatments including both NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors when compared to treatments including 5-HT₃ inhibitors only. Rather, the results of our NMA suggest that the choice of 5-HT₃ inhibitor may have an impact on treatment efficacy in preventing CINV.  When interpreting the results of this systematic review, it is important for the reader to understand that NMAs are no substitute for direct head-to-head comparisons, and that results of our NMA do not necessarily rule out differences that could be clinically relevant for some individuals.

Influence of CYP2D6 metabolizer status on ondansetron efficacy in pediatric patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A case series

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is commonly experienced by patients receiving antineoplastic agents prior to hemopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Ondansetron, a 5‐HT3 antagonist metabolized by CYP2D6, is an antiemetic prescribed to treat short‐term CINV, but some patients still experience uncontrolled nausea and vomiting while taking ondansetron. Adult CYP2D6 ultrarapid metabolizers (UMs) are at higher risk for CINV due to rapid ondansetron clearance, but similar studies have not been performed in pediatric patients. We performed a retrospective chart review of 128 pediatric HSCT recipients who received ondansetron for CINV prevention and had CYP2D6 genotyping for 20 alleles and duplication detection. The number of emetic episodes for each patient was collected from the start of chemotherapy through 7 days after HSCT. The average age of the cohort was 6.6 years (range: 0.2–16.7) and included three UMs, 72 normal metabolizers, 47 intermediate metabolizers, and six poor metabolizers. Because UMs are the population at risk for inefficacy, we describe the course of treatment for these three patients, as well as the factors influencing emesis: chemotherapy emetogenicity, diagnosis, and duration of ondansetron administration. The cases described support guidelines recommending non‐CYP2D6 metabolized antiemetics (e.g., granisetron) when a patient is a known CYP2D6 UM, but pediatric studies with a larger sample of CYP2D6 UMs are needed to validate our findings.

The Ciji-Hua'ai-Baosheng II Formula Attenuates Chemotherapy-Induced Anorexia in Mice With H22 Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background: Ciji-Hua’ai-Baosheng II Formula (CHB-II-F) is a traditional Chinese medicine formula, which specifically targets different aspects of chemotherapy-induced adverse effects in patients with cancer. In our clinical application, CHB-II-F significantly alleviated chemotherapy-induced anorexia (loss of appetite) and improved the quality of life for patients with tumor during and after chemotherapy. However, the mechanism of CHB-II-F in alleviation of chemotherapy-induced anorexia remains to be further investigated.

Aim of Study: To explore the therapeutic effect and mechanism of CHB-II-F on chemotherapy-induced anorexia in the mice model of H₂₂ hepatoma.

Materials and Methods: A total of 72 Kunming mice of SPF grade were inoculated subcutaneously with H₂₂ hepatoma cells into the right anterior armpit of the mice. After 1 week of seeding, mice were injected intraperitoneally with a high dose of 5-fluorouracil (200 mg/kg 5-FU) to establish the model of chemotherapy. The mice were randomly divided into six groups: untreated group, 5-FU group, 5-FU plus Yangzheng Xiaoji capsule (YZXJC) group, and three groups of 5-FU plus different concentrations of CHB-II-F. All the mice in each group were treated for 14 days. The body weight, food intake, tumor volume, and tumor weight of mice were measured, and pathological examinations of tumor tissue, stomach, and duodenum were carried out. Expressions of serum Leptin, Neuropeptide Y (NPY), epidermal cell growth factor (EGF), Motilin (MTL), Orexin A (OXA), Gastrin (GAS), Ghrelin, Prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂), and jejunum superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and malondialdehyde (MDA) content were examined. The protein and mRNA levels of proopiomelanocortin (POMC), Orexin receptor 1 (OX1R), neuropeptide Y (NPY), cocaine and amphetamine regulated transcript peptide (CART), Agouti gene-related protein (AgRP), Leptin receptor (Ob-R), and Ghrelin receptor (GHSR) were examined in hypothalamus, and the protein levels of substance P (SP) and 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in duodenum were measured.

Results: The combination of CHB-II-F and 5-FU could enhance the inhibitory effect of 5-FU on tumor. The tumor inhibition rates of 5-FU group, YZXJC group, CHB-II-F(H) group, CHB-II-F(M) group, and CHB-II-F(L) group were 58.88, 28.08, 54.96, 37.69, and 28.61%, respectively. Compared with untreated group and 5-FU group, CHB-II-F significantly increased the body weight and food intake of tumor-bearing mice; increased the content of NPY, Orexin A, Ghrelin, GAS, MTL, EGF, and PGE₂ in serum and the activity of SOD in jejunum; and decreased the content of Leptin in serum and the content of MDA in jejunum. Compared with untreated group and 5-FU group, CHB-II-F also enhanced the expression of OX1R, GHSR, NPY, and AgRP protein and gene and decreased the expression of Ob-R, POMC, and CART protein and gene in hypothalamus of mice, and the gene expression was consistent with the protein expression. In addition, CHB-II-F decreased the expression of 5-HT and SP protein in duodenum.

Conclusion: In the murine model of H22 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving chemotherapy, CHB-II-F enhances the inhibitory effect of 5-FU on tumor, significantly improves the pathological injury of gastrointestinal tract caused by chemotherapy, and regulates the secretion of gastrointestinal hormones. It may alleviate chemotherapy-induced anorexia by affecting appetite regulatory factors in the feeding area of hypothalamus central nervous system and peripheral appetite regulatory factors.

Granisetron Extended-Release Subcutaneous Injection versus Palonosetron Infusion for CINV Prevention: Cost Comparison of Unscheduled Hydration

BACKGROUND

Granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (SC) injection is a novel formulation of granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Palonosetron is administered intravenously and is indicated for CINV prevention in acute and delayed phases after the use of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and in the acute phase after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). No data are available regarding the impact of SC granisetron on the cost of unscheduled hydration compared with other antiemetic drugs, specifically the older-generation palonosetron.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the costs of unscheduled hydration associated with breakthrough CINV after SC granisetron versus palonosetron administration in patients receiving MEC or HEC.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis was based on electronic medical records data from a single multicenter, community-based practice involving patients receiving MEC or HEC with a 3-drug antiemetic regimen, including a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and either SC granisetron or palonosetron. A cost-of-care analysis for SC granisetron and palonosetron was based on the maximum per-unit Medicare reimbursement amounts for the use of unscheduled hydration, administration of rescue antiemetic drugs, laboratory tests, and patient office evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patient records were evaluated, 91 for patients receiving SC granisetron and 91 receiving palonosetron. The mean per-patient cost of care related to unscheduled hydration in patients receiving HEC or MEC was significantly lower with SC granisetron ($296) than palonosetron ($837; P <.0001), including subset analysis of patients requiring additional care (SC granisetron [$691], N = 39; palonosetron [$1058], N = 72; P = .0260). The mean hydration costs per patient receiving HEC or MEC were lower with SC granisetron ($62) than with palonosetron ($253; P <.0001). The hydration costs per patient receiving only HEC were lower with SC granisetron ($66) than palonosetron ($280; P <.0001). The per-patient costs were lower when SC granisetron was administered than when palonosetron was administered as part of the antiemetic regimen, except for the cost of rescue antiemetic drug in patients receiving MEC. Fewer median unscheduled hydration therapies per patient were used with SC granisetron versus palonosetron (HEC, 3 vs 5; MEC, 2 vs 3).

CONCLUSION

The use of SC granisetron reduced the total per-patient costs of care associated with unscheduled hydration compared with palonosetron in patients receiving HEC or MEC for breakthrough CINV events.

Adverse Drug Reaction Profile of Anticancer Agents in a Tertiary Care Hospital: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Anti-cancer agents are known to be toxic, leading to a number of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). ADRs not only increase the financial burden on patient/healthcare system but also decrease quality of life. Understanding the burden of ADR will help strengthen the knowledge on patient safety and thereby in implementing intervention strategies to reduce it.

OBJECTIVES

1. To study the pattern of Adverse drug reaction of anticancer agents of patients admitted in the oncology ward. 2. To assess the causality, severity, and preventability of the adverse drug reactions observed.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, observational study carried out in 200 adult patients in the daycare center for chemotherapy. Details of ADRs noted in the previous and current cycles were noted. Causality assessment was done using Naranjo and WHO scale. For severity and preventability assessment Hartwig Siegel and Modified Schumock Thorton scale were used respectively.

RESULTS

Out of the total 732 ADRs encountered, alopecia was the most common ADR. The average number of ADRs observed per patient was 3.66 + 1.59(mean + SD). The maximum number of ADRs were seen in Paclitaxel-carboplatin 3 weekly regimen. Nausea and alopecia were the most common ADRs reported with most regimens. On causality assessment, 95(12.97%) were definitely related according to Naranjo's Causality scale, while 15.71% were certainly related according to WHO scale. Of all the ADRs recorded,47.81% were of moderate-intensity while 52.18% were of mild intensity. The majority of ADRs were not preventable, 87.59%.

CONCLUSION

Alopecia was the most common ADR reported. Most of the ADRs could be causally related to drugs. These ADRs were mild to moderate in severity and were not preventable. There is need to identify the underlying factors that predispose patients to these ADRs and target them in future research.

Forsythiae Fructus aqueous extract attenuates cisplatin-induced kaolin consumption (pica) by inhibiting NLRP3 inflammasome activation in rats

The present study was conducted to evaluate the effect of Forsythiae Fructus aqueous extract (FAE) against cisplatin-induced emesis and to explore the antiemetic mechanism of FAE by focusing on NLRP3 inflammasome activation in a rat pica model. Our results showed that FAE significantly ameliorated cisplatin-induced acute and delayed pica in rats. Moreover, FAE improved the gastrointestinal histopathological injury and reduced the levels of serum ROS, IL-1β, and IL-18 in cisplatin-treated rats. In addition, the expressions of NLRP3, ASC, caspase-1, and IL-1β and the colocalization of the NLRP3 with ASC or caspase-1 in rat gastric antrum and ileum were also suppressed by FAE. Taken together, our findings indicate that FAE has a therapeutic effect against CINV, which may be related to its inhibition of the activation of NLRP3 inflammasome.

Single daily dosing versus divided dosing intravenous ondansetron to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among children: A comparative randomized double-blind controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common complication in cancer treatment. Ondansetron is an effective antiemetic drug widely used to prevent CINV; however, the effective administrative dosing strategies among pediatrics remain unclear. The study aimed to investigate clinical effectiveness of single daily dosing versus divided dosing ondansetron.

METHODS

In all, 194 children undergoing chemotherapy were randomized to receive either single daily dosing (0.3 mg/kg/dose) or divided dosing (0.15 mg/kg/dose every 8 hours) intravenous ondansetron for 24 hours. Clinical parameters including number of emesis episodes, nausea scores, appetite levels, parent's satisfaction, and adverse effects within 24 hours were analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two dosing strategies concerning number of emesis episodes and parent's satisfaction. However, nonleukemic hematologic malignancies and concurrent administration of intrathecal methotrexate-hydrocortisone-cytarabine (IT-MHA) were associated with increased risk of acute-phase vomiting. Interestingly, none of the patients aged under 7 years, receiving divided dosing ondansetron, presented nausea symptoms compared with those receiving single daily dosing (p-value .034). No significant differences regarding headache were observed between the two dosing strategies and none of the patients experienced QTc prolongation.

CONCLUSION

Ondansetron administered as divided dosing should be considered among children aged under 7 years to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and among patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy to maintain their appetite. Both administrative dosing strategies were well tolerated with no significant adverse effects.

The effectiveness of NEPA in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting among chemo naive patients in an Indian setting

Background

Chemotherapy induced nausea- vomiting (CINV) is considered as the most common, feared and most troublesome side effect of chemotherapy. NEPA (NEtupitant 300 mg + PAlonosetron 0.50 mg) is the first commercially available oral fixed-dose combination (FDC) of two active antiemetic agents in India. The present study was planned to evaluate the effectiveness of NEPA in the real world setting of India.

Methods

This was a multicentric retrospective study conducted in two centers in India. The data of all chemonaive patients, who were prescribed NEPA was analyzed. Effectiveness i.e. complete response and complete protection in controlling overall, acute and delayed phase was analyzed.

Results

A total of 329 patients were enrolled in the study. 260 received highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) regimen and 69 received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimen. Among all the enrolled patients, complete response in acute, delayed and overall phase was 93, 85.71 and 85.41% respectively; and completed protection was 88.44, 81.76 and 80.54% respectively. Those who received HEC regimen, the completed response and complete protection in overall phase was 84.61 and 79.61% respectively and those who received MEC regimen the completed response and complete control in overall phase was 84.05 and 84.05% respectively.

Conclusion

A single oral dose of NEPA targeting dual pathways showed effective control of nausea-vomiting in patients on the HEC and MEC regimens and had good control over nausea-vomiting in acute, delayed and overall phase of nausea-vomiting.

Hyperemesis Gravidarum: Strategies to Improve Outcomes

Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a debilitating and potentially life-threatening pregnancy disease marked by weight loss, malnutrition, and dehydration attributed to unrelenting nausea and/or vomiting; HG increases the risk of adverse outcomes for the mother and child(ren). The complexity of HG affects every aspect of a woman's life during and after pregnancy. Without methodical intervention by knowledgeable and proactive clinicians, life-threatening complications may develop. Effectively managing HG requires an understanding of both physical and psychosocial stressors, recognition of potential risks and complications, and proactive assessment and treatment strategies using innovative clinical tools.

Pharmacokinetics and safety evaluation of oral Palonosetron in Chinese healthy volunteers: A phase 1, open-label, randomized, cross-over study

PURPOSE

Palonosetron hydrochloride is a specific 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, used to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and is a known chemical entity currently registered in the oral and IV forms in several countries worldwide.

METHODS

Single-center, single-dose, 3-treatment, open-label, randomized, 3-period, phase-I cross-over study, conducted in 18 individuals (16 males and 2 females). The primary objective was to assess the pharmacokinetic profile of Palonosetron 0.25, 0.5 and 0.75mg, after a single, oral administration in Chinese male and female healthy volunteers.

RESULTS

After administration of a single oral dose of 0.25mg, 0.5mg, or 0.75mg palonosetron in Chinese male and female healthy subjects, plasma palonosetron concentrations reached maximum values (C_max) of 673 ± 151 pg/mL, 1330 ± 258 pg/mL, and 1990 ± 490 pg/mL, respectively, at 3-5 h (t_max). The plasma elimination half-life for 0.25, 0.5 and 0.75 mg of palonosetron was 41.8±9.72 hours, 44.6±8.59 hours and 42.3±8.51 hours, respectively. Single oral doses of 0.25mg, 0.5mg, or 0.75mg palonosetron were safe and well tolerated among all the 18 subjects involved.

CONCLUSIONS

The PK of palonosetron was found to be linear in the dose range of 0.25 to 0.75 mg. Oral palonosetron in doses up to 0.75 mg was well tolerated in healthy Chinese subjects. The PK and safety data obtained from this study were similar to previous phase I studies with IV palonosetron.

Efficacy of Auricular Acupressure in Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

More than 40% of patients with cancer have reported that chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remained the most debilitating side effects of treatment even in the era of new antiemetics.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate the clinical effect of auricular acupressure (AA) in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, the Web of Science, Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP (from database inception to April 2020). Eligible randomized controlled trials of auricular acupressure in treating CINV were collected, including crossover randomized design study. The meta-analysis was carried out by RevMan software (5.3).

RESULTS

Totally 19 RCTs with 1449 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with control groups, the relief efficiency of overall CINV was enhanced by AA combined with antiemetics (RR = 1.31, CI 1.22 to 1.41, p ≤ 0.001). Although the therapeutic effect on acute nausea and vomiting was not obvious, AA still played an important role in reducing delayed nausea and vomiting (delayed nausea frequency: RR = 0.68, CI -1.01 to -1.35, p ≤ 0.001; delayed vomiting frequency: RR = 0.91, CI -1.22 to -0.61, p ≤ 0.001). The likelihood of adverse reactions related to antiemetics was reduced by AA combined with antiemetics (RR = 0.62, CI 0.53 to 0.74, p ≤ 0.001). Statistically significant association was found between AA and incidence of constipation, diarrhea, and tiredness, while there was no statistically significant association between AA and abdominal distension or headache.

CONCLUSION

Auricular acupressure supplementation benefited delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting as well as constipation, diarrhea, and tiredness. AA alone or AA supplementation has little effect on acute nausea and acute vomiting. There is no conclusion on whether AA alone is superior to antiemetics in the management of delayed CINV. Further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of auricular acupressure alone in delayed CINV and anticipatory CINV. The results of this review provided the basis for further research with more rigorous study designs, adequate sample sizes, and standardized implementation to confirm the efficacy of auricular acupressure.

Elevated serum substance P level as a predictive marker for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A prospective cohort study

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is an unbearable side effect. Identifying high emetic risk patients and providing more active antiemetics strategies are mandatory to improve the tolerability of chemotherapy. In this prospective cohort study, leptin, ghrelin, and substance P were measured at baseline, day 3, and day 14 during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Nausea and vomiting were measured each day for the first 4 days of the first cycle of chemotherapy. Eighty‐two patients were enrolled. Colorectal cancer (61%) and gastric cancer (35.4%) were common cancer types. All patients received moderate emetic risk chemotherapy. Forty‐five (54.9%) patients had nausea, and 15 (18.3%) patients experienced vomiting. In univariate analysis, a higher level of baseline substance P, which is a target of NK1‐RA (Neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist), was a significant predictive marker for chemotherapy‐induced nausea [odds ratio (OR): 2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02–6.62, p = 0.046]. Regarding chemotherapy‐induced vomiting, patients with higher levels of substance P had a greater chance of vomiting [OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.49–5.99, p = 0.395] than those with lower levels of substance P. In patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy, active antiemetics, including NK1‐RA, could be considered for those with high levels of substance P.

Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Pathogenesis, Recommendations, and New Trends

The significant physical and emotional effects of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are experienced by cancer patients. Severe symptoms decrease the patient's quality of life and potentially deters further treatment. The five main forms of CINV (i.e., acute, delayed, anticipatory, breakthrough, and refractory) require different treatment regimens, which often include 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids. Despite a significant amount of research and development of antiemetic agents, management of CINV remains a great challenge with many needs waiting to be adequately addressed, such as controlling non-acute CINV, developing appropriate CINV treatment protocols for multiple-day chemotherapy patients, and providing options for those prone to CINV despite treatment. Further research is required to optimize CINV management for these patients.

Chinese Herbal Medicine for Reducing Chemotherapy-Associated Side-Effects in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Chemotherapy usually induces a variety of side-effects in cancer treatment as it cannot tell normal cells apart from cancer cells and kills both. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been regarded as a potential effective intervention for relieving the side-effects of chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

Objective

This study aims to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of CHM as adjuvant therapy for reducing the chemotherapy-induced side-effects in the treatment of breast cancer.

Methods

Main electronic databases were searched up to May 2020 for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of CHM on breast cancer patients with chemotherapy. The PRISMA statement was adopted in this study and meta-analyses were performed.

Results

The included studies showed unsatisfied quality. Results based on available literature indicated that the adjunctive use of CHM with chemotherapy may reduce the chemotherapeutic agents-associated adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, alopecia, myelosuppression, and impaired immune function.

Conclusion

A confident conclusion could not be have due to the lack of large scale and high quality trials.

Efficacy of Antiemetic Regimens for Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Patients of Breast Cancer Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Background: Chemotherapy is fraught with serious and troublesome adverse effects, of which nausea and vomiting appears earliest and is the most disturbing. Therefore, this study was planned to investigate the antiemetic drug regimens used for chemotherapy-induced nausea vomiting (CINV) in patients with breast cancer receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Subjects and Methods: An observational follow-up study was conducted to assess the efficacy of antiemetic regimens in breast cancer patients receiving HEC. A total of 71 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer were included in the study. Patients were assessed for nausea by the visual analog scale, and a history of emetic episodes and need for rescue medication were recorded at 0 h, 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 120 h post-chemotherapy till three cycles. Results: The patients were prescribed a combination of ondansetron and dexamethasone (n = 23, n = 17, and n = 13 in first, second, and third cycle, respectively) or a combination of aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone (n = 48, n = 54 and n = 56 in the first, second, and third cycle, respectively). The intensity of nausea was higher for the patients who were prescribed ondansetron and dexamethasone regimen as compared to patients prescribed aprepitant additionally. Complete response, i.e., no emesis and no rescue medication, was higher in triple-drug regimen (52% vs. 0.4%, 63% vs. 17.6%, and 69% vs. 23% in three cycles, respectively). Conclusion: The control of CINV was better with a combination of aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone as compared to a regimen without aprepitant.

An overview of acute gastrointestinal side effects of systemic anti-cancer therapy and their management

Treatment-related acute gastrointestinal toxicities are a common and often debilitating hurdle encountered in the treatment of cancer patients. While the introduction of targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors has led to improvements in survival outcomes, their use has also been complicated by a high frequency of clinically important adverse effects. Gastrointestinal toxicities such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and hepatotoxicity represent potentially serious adverse events that may necessitate dose reductions, treatment interruptions and cessation of treatment. An improved knowledge of the incidence, pathophysiology, management and prophylaxis of these toxicities is crucial in order to reduce patient morbidity and mortality. In this review, we discuss the main gastrointestinal toxicities associated with chemotherapy and targeted therapies in oncology, outlining their incidence, pathophysiology and expert management guidelines.

Pharmacokinetic Modeling of the Impact of P-glycoprotein on Ondansetron Disposition in the Central Nervous System

PURPOSE

Modulation of 5-HT3 receptor in the central nervous system (CNS) is a promising approach for treatment of neuropathic pain. The goal was to evaluate the role of P-glycoprotein (Pgp) in limiting exposure of different parts of the CNS to ondansetron (5-HT3 receptor antagonist) using wild-type and genetic knockout rat model.

METHODS

Plasma pharmacokinetics and CNS (brain, spinal cord, and cerebrospinal fluid) disposition was studied after single 10 mg/kg intravenous dose.

RESULTS

Pgp knockout resulted in significantly higher concentrations of ondansetron in all tested regions of the CNS at most of the time points. The mean ratio of the concentrations between KO and WT animals was 2.39-5.48, depending on the region of the CNS. Male and female animals demonstrated some difference in ondansetron plasma pharmacokinetics and CNS disposition. Mechanistic pharmacokinetic model that included two systemic disposition and three CNS compartments (with intercompartmental exchange) was developed. Pgp transport was incorporated as an efflux from the brain and spinal cord to the central compartment. The model provided good simultaneous description of all data sets, and all parameters were estimated with sufficient precision.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides important quantitative information on the role of Pgp in limiting ondansetron exposure in various regions of the CNS using data from wild-type and Pgp knockout rats. CSF drug concentrations, as a surrogate to CNS exposure, are likely to underestimate the effect of Pgp on drug penetration to the brain and the spinal cord.

RENISUS Plants and Their Potential Antitumor Effects in Clinical Trials and Registered Patents

Cancer is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Scientific advances, coupled with potential flaws in current treatments, are driving research into the discovery of new bioactive molecules. This systematic review focused on scientific studies with clinical trials and patents registered on the National Relation of Medicinal Plants of Interest to the Unified Health System (RENISUS) plants (or derivative compounds) with antitumor potential. Studies with 19 different forms of cancer were found, the prostate being the organ with the highest research incidence and the species Glycine max, Curcuma longa, and Zingiber officinale, beside the phytochemicals curcumin and soy isoflavone were the most tested in clinical trials/patents.

Unscheduled hydrations: redefining complete response in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting studies

Breakthrough chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is nausea and/or vomiting occurring within 5 days of chemotherapy administration despite using guideline-directed prophylactic antiemetic agents. It is highly prevalent (30–40%), usually requiring immediate treatment or “rescue” medication. If breakthrough CINV occurs, antiemetic guidelines recommend using an antiemetic agent from a different class not used in prophylaxis, along with intravenous hydration and/or dexamethasone. Data supporting these guideline recommendations are limited. Importantly, costs associated with breakthrough CINV can be substantial (i.e., unscheduled hydrations). Two retrospective analyses evaluating guideline-adherent CINV prophylaxis suggest that the initial antiemetic selection may decrease breakthrough CINV. Here we review optimal CINV prophylactic strategies and introduce unscheduled hydration as a potential important surrogate for breakthrough CINV aligning with cost-effective cancer care.

Metoclopramide, Dexamethasone, or Palonosetron for Prevention of Delayed Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting After Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy (MEDEA): A Randomized, Phase III, Noninferiority Trial

BACKGROUND

For the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the delayed phase (24-120 hours) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), the use of 3-day dexamethasone (DEX) is often recommended. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two DEX-sparing regimens with 3-day DEX, focusing on delayed nausea.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This open-label, randomized, phase III study was designed to demonstrate noninferiority of two DEX-sparing regimens: ondansetron + DEX on day 1 + metoclopramide on days 2-3 (MCP arm), and palonosetron + DEX on day 1 (PAL arm) versus ondansetron on day 1 + DEX on days 1-3 (DEX arm) in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving MEC. Primary efficacy endpoint was total control (TC; no emetic episodes, no use of rescue medication, no nausea) in the delayed phase. Noninferiority was defined as a lower 95% CI greater than the noninferiority margin set at -20%. Secondary endpoints included no vomiting, no rescue medication, no (significant) nausea, impact of CINV on quality of life, and antiemetics-associated side effects.

RESULTS

Treatment arms were comparable for 189 patients analyzed: predominantly male (55.7%), median age 65.0 years, colorectal cancer (85.7%), and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (81.5%). MCP demonstrated noninferiority to DEX for delayed TC (MCP 56.1% vs. DEX 50.0%; 95% CI, -11.3%, 23.5%). PAL also demonstrated noninferiority to DEX (PAL 55.6% vs. DEX 50.0%; 95% CI, -12.0%, 23.2%). There were no statistically significant differences for all secondary endpoints between treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that DEX-sparing regimens are noninferior to multiple-day DEX in terms of delayed TC rate in patients undergoing MEC. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier. NCT02135510.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in the delayed phase (24-120 hours after chemotherapy) remains one of the most troublesome adverse effects associated with cancer treatment. In particular, delayed nausea is often poorly controlled. The role of dexamethasone (DEX) in the prevention of delayed nausea after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) is controversial. This study is the first to include nausea assessment as a part of the primary study outcome to better gauge the effectiveness of CINV control and patients' experience. Results show that a DEX-sparing strategy does not result in any significant loss of overall antiemetic control: DEX-sparing strategies incorporating palonosetron or multiple-day metoclopramide are safe and at least as effective as standard treatment with a 3-day DEX regimen with ondansetron in controlling delayed CINV-and nausea in particular-following MEC.

Acupuncture treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) make many patients have negative adherence of treatment. Acupuncture has been widely applied in treatment of CINV, but its efficacy has not been evaluated scientifically and systematically in recent years. Hence, evaluating the safety and effectiveness of acupuncture treatment in patients with CINV is the main purpose of this review.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the following electronic databases from inception to Mar 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, the Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wan-Fang Database and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP database). All published academic data about clinical randomized controlled trials in English or Chinese related to acupuncture for treating CINV will be obtained. The primary outcomes are defined as frequency and severity of CINV during chemotherapy. The secondary outcomes are defined as any adverse events and quality of life of CINV during chemotherapy. The study selection, data extraction, and assessment of study quality will be conducted by 2 researchers independently. Review Manager Software (RevMan) V.5.3 will be performed for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The results of this review will provide a high-quality synthesis of current available evidence to evaluate acupuncture is an effective and safe treatment for CINV.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of this review will provide the highest level of evidence to judge whether acupuncture is an effective and safe treatment for patients suffered from CINV.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020153993.

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

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

A randomized trial of nurse-administered behavioral interventions to manage anticipatory nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy side effects diminish quality of life and can lead to treatment delay. Nausea and vomiting can occur prior to chemotherapy because of classical conditioning. We studied the effects of 20-minute behavioral interventions, administered by oncology nurses, of higher intensity (mindfulness relaxation-MR) or lower intensity (relaxing music-RM), on anticipatory nausea and vomiting (ANV).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumors were randomized to MR (N = 160), RM (N = 159), or standard care SC (N = 155). Subjects were mostly female (91.8%) and white (86.1%) with breast cancer (85%). Most patients had early stage disease (Stage I: 26%; II: 52.9%; III: 19%; IV: 0.1%). Anticipatory nausea and vomiting were assessed at the midpoint and end of the chemotherapy course using the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis (MANE).

RESULTS

Compared to SC, there was reduced anticipatory nausea at the midpoint of chemotherapy in those receiving MR (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.93) and RM (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20-0.93), controlling for age, sex, cancer stage, and emetogenic level of chemotherapy. There was no difference between treatment groups in anticipatory nausea at the end of chemotherapy or in anticipatory vomiting and postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting at either time point.

CONCLUSION

A brief nurse-delivered behavioral intervention can reduce midpoint ANV associated with chemotherapy.

Therapeutic potential of medicinal plants indicated by the Brazilian public health system in treating the collateral effects induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This study, through a systematic review, evaluated the therapeutic effect of medicinal plants that were of interest to the Unified Health System (SUS) in treating the side effects induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in cancer patients.

METHODOLOGY

According to the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Lilacs and Scopus databases from January 2009 to December 2018, using the groups of descriptors (Cancer OR Neoplasia OR Tumor) and (controlled clinical trial OR randomized clinical trial) associated with the scientific names of the 71 medicinal plants described in RENISUS. The study is registered in PROSPERO CRD42019129927.

RESULTS

Of the 29 articles selected, only 17 demonstrated the therapeutic potential of plants included in RENISUS to prevent or treat the side effects induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, either solely or through an adjuvant effect from drugs already used in the medical clinic. The two plant-based therapies that had the most studies exploring their therapeutic potential on side effects were Zingiber officinale and Aloe vera.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that some plants listed in RENISUS have shown preventive and curative potential on side effects induced by conventional treatments in patients with different types of cancer. Therefore, the use of scientifically proven herbal products, in conjunction with conventional therapies, can contribute to a better quality of life in cancer patients undergoing conventional treatments.

Efficacy of olanzapine, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and thalidomide in combination with palonosetron plus dexamethasone in preventing highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Olanzapine, neurokinin-1-receptor-antagonists (NK-1-RA), and thalidomide added to palonosetron + dexamethasone (PALO-DEX) have been evaluated in separate studies as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) due to highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the prophylactic efficacy of these agents in combination with PALO-DEX.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline/Ovid, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception through 22 Mar 2018. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane methodology. A Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects models was used to asses complete response (CR) and rate of no nausea (RNN) in acute, delayed, and overall phases and were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible interval (95% CrI). Ranking probabilities of treatments were calculated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to identify the probability of a given treatment as the best option against the worst option.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs involving two thousand nine hundred fifty-nine patients were included. The olanzapine-based regimen showed greater CR in the acute, delayed, and overall-phases versus the PALO-DEX regimen (OR = 3.97, 95% CrI = 1.02-19.13; OR = 5.62, 95% CrI = 1.66-28.58; OR = 4.79, 95% CrI = 1.40-24.02, respectively). Additionally, it showed greater RNN than the NK-1-RA-based and the PALO-DEX regimens in the delayed phase only (OR = 2.90, 95% CrI = 1.34-5.15; OR = 4.53, 95% CrI = 1.89-10.55, respectively). Olanzapine-, NK-1-RA-, and thalidomide-based regimens did not differ in CR in the three phases. SUCRA probabilities ranked the olanzapine-based regimen as the best option in terms of CR and RNN, while ranking the NK-1-RA-based regimens as the second best option in terms of CR throughout the three phases.

CONCLUSION

Based on the data included in the analyses, there is insufficient evidence to support adding thalidomide or NK-1-RA to PALO-DEX in preventing CINV induced by HEC. However, adding olanzapine to PALO-DEX achieves better CR and RNN. Olanzapine side-effects and the absence of direct comparisons explain why some guidelines are cautious in suggesting the use of olanzapine.

Olanzapine for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Comparative Study From Sudan

Purpose

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a distressing adverse effect. Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA)–containing regimens are the standard regimens for CINV prophylaxis in patients with cancer receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC). NK1RA agents are expensive and were not registered in Sudan. Recently, regimens containing olanzapine, the available and affordable medication in Sudan, were introduced as another option. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of an olanzapine-containing regimen with the antiemetic regimen that was currently used in our institute for CINV prophylaxis in HEC/MEC settings.

Patients and Methods

The study prospectively compared an olanzapine-containing regimen (acute phase: olanzapine, ondansetron, dexamethasone; delayed phase: olanzapine, ondansetron) with an ondansetron/dexamethasone regimen (acute phase: ondansetron, dexamethasone; delayed phase: ondansetron) in adult patients with cancer receiving HEC or MEC. The study outcomes were complete response (CR; no emesis and no rescue medications) and nausea control (no nausea), which were assessed in the acute (0 to 24 hours), delayed (24 to 120 hours), and overall (0 to 120 hours) phases.

Results

The study included 131 patients (olanzapine-containing: 50 patients; ondansetron/dexamethasone: 81 patients). CR and nausea control were higher in the olanzapine-containing than in the ondansetron/dexamethasone regimen (CR: acute phase, 86% v 71.6%; P = .086; delayed phase, 72% v 30.9%; P < .001; overall phase, 66% v 25.9%; P < .001; nausea control: acute phase, 86% v 74.1%; P = .127; delayed phase, 76% v 34.6%; P < .001; overall phase, 72% v 29.6%; P < .001). The major toxicity of olanzapine was grade 1 and 2 sedation or drowsiness (25 patients).

Conclusion

An olanzapine-containing regimen has better efficacy for prevention of CINV in the HEC/MEC setting. Oncologists working in a limited-resource setting should be familiar with olanzapine-containing regimens, because NK1RA agents are not affordable and not easily available.