Lisa Kottschade1, Paul Novotny2, Alan Lyss3, Miroslaw Mazurczak4, Charles Loprinzi1, Debra Barton5. 1. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Heartland Cancer Research CCOP, Missouri Baptist Medical Center, Saint Louis, MO, USA. 4. Sanford NCI Community Oncology Research Program, Sioux Falls, SD, USA. 5. School of Nursing, University of Michigan, 400 N. Ingalls, Suite 2153, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. debbartn@med.umich.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite newer agents, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) continues to remain a distressing side effect to a proportion of patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer therapy. METHODS: We recently performed an unplanned secondary analysis on a previously reported negative phase III trial (N08C3) looking at the efficacy of gabapentin/placebo in combination with dexamethasone and a 5HT3 receptor antagonist in the prevention of CINV for 413 patients undergoing regimens with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In the current study, we attempted to better understand the higher than expected rate of overall patient satisfaction, despite a low complete response rate in both arms. Additionally, we looked at patient variables and their relationship to rates of CINV. RESULTS: Approximately one third of patients experienced more than mild nausea and reported scores on the Functional Living Index-Emesis that indicated interference with activities. Thirty-five percent reported nausea greater than 2.5 on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 being none), 19 % reported at least one emetic episode, and 49 % reported taking rescue medication. Nausea and vomiting on day 1, cisplatin therapy, and history of motion sickness significantly predicted delayed CINV. Age, combination chemotherapy (HEC with moderately emetogenic), and getting treatment for breast cancer predicted CINV on day 1. DISCUSSION: These data confirm previous reports that subgroups of patients may be more prone to acute and delayed CINV. Future CINV study design may benefit from a more individualized approach to CINV management, targeting those patients who are truly at risk for CINV despite continued drug development efforts.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Despite newer agents, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) continues to remain a distressing side effect to a proportion of patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer therapy. METHODS: We recently performed an unplanned secondary analysis on a previously reported negative phase III trial (N08C3) looking at the efficacy of gabapentin/placebo in combination with dexamethasone and a 5HT3 receptor antagonist in the prevention of CINV for 413 patients undergoing regimens with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In the current study, we attempted to better understand the higher than expected rate of overall patient satisfaction, despite a low complete response rate in both arms. Additionally, we looked at patient variables and their relationship to rates of CINV. RESULTS: Approximately one third of patients experienced more than mild nausea and reported scores on the Functional Living Index-Emesis that indicated interference with activities. Thirty-five percent reported nausea greater than 2.5 on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 being none), 19 % reported at least one emetic episode, and 49 % reported taking rescue medication. Nausea and vomiting on day 1, cisplatin therapy, and history of motion sickness significantly predicted delayed CINV. Age, combination chemotherapy (HEC with moderately emetogenic), and getting treatment for breast cancer predicted CINV on day 1. DISCUSSION: These data confirm previous reports that subgroups of patients may be more prone to acute and delayed CINV. Future CINV study design may benefit from a more individualized approach to CINV management, targeting those patients who are truly at risk for CINV despite continued drug development efforts.
Entities:
Keywords:
Characteristics; Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; Delayed nausea and vomiting; Incidence; Oncology
Authors: D Campos; J R Pereira; R R Reinhardt; C Carracedo; S Poli; C Vogel; J Martinez-Cedillo; A Erazo; J Wittreich; L O Eriksson; A D Carides; B J Gertz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Debra L Barton; Gita Thanarajasingam; Jeff A Sloan; Brent Diekmann; Jyotsna Fuloria; Lisa A Kottschade; Alan P Lyss; Anthony J Jaslowski; Miroslaw A Mazurczak; Scott C Blair; Shelby Terstriep; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-07-09 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Joseph A Roscoe; Gary R Morrow; Jane T Hickok; Karen M Mustian; Abhay R Shelke Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Steven M Grunberg; Robert R Deuson; Panagiotis Mavros; Olga Geling; Mogens Hansen; Giorgio Cruciani; Bruno Daniele; Gerard De Pouvourville; Edward B Rubenstein; Gedske Daugaard Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lucas Vieira dos Santos; Fabiano Hahn Souza; Andre Tesainer Brunetto; Andre Deeke Sasse; João Paulo da Silveira Nogueira Lima Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: N Bouganim; G Dranitsaris; S Hopkins; L Vandermeer; L Godbout; S Dent; P Wheatley-Price; C Milano; M Clemons Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: R M Navari; R R Reinhardt; R J Gralla; M G Kris; P J Hesketh; A Khojasteh; H Kindler; T H Grote; K Pendergrass; S M Grunberg; A D Carides; B J Gertz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-01-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Joaquim Teixeira de Avelar Júnior; Edleusa Lima-Batista; Célio José Castro Junior; Adriano Monteiro de Castro Pimenta; Raquel Gouvêa Dos Santos; Elaine Maria Souza-Fagundes; Maria Elena De Lima Journal: Front Mol Biosci Date: 2022-05-04
Authors: Komal P Singh; Kord M Kober; Brenda Ernst; Jasgit Sachdev; Melanie Brewer; Qiyun Zhu; Haiwei Gu; Michele Melisko; Steven M Paul; Bruce A Cooper; Marilyn Hammer; Yvette P Conley; Jon D Levine; Christine Miaskowski Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2022 May-Jun 01 Impact factor: 2.760