Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of fosaprepitant-associated infusion site adverse events (ISAEs) among a cohort of breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy. Methods A retrospective review of electronic medical record (EMR) data was performed for all patients who were initiated on AC from January 2011 to April 2012. Data collected included baseline demographics, antiemetic regimen, documentation of ISAEs and type of intravenous (IV) access. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation or percentages) were summarized overall, by type of IV access and initial antiemetic given. Results Among the 148 patients included in this analysis, 98 initially received fosaprepitant and 44 received aprepitant. The incidence of ISAEs associated with fosaprepitant administration was 34.7% (n=34), while the incidence of aprepitant-associated ISAEs was 2.3% (n=1). All ISAEs were associated with peripheral IV access. The most commonly reported ISAEs were: infusion site pain (n=26), erythema (n=22), swelling (n=12), superficial thrombosis (n=8), infusion site hives (n=5) and phlebitis/thrombophlebitis (n=5). Twenty-six patients experienced more than one type of ISAE. Conclusions The incidence and severity of ISAEs associated with fosaprepitant administration among a group of patients receiving AC chemotherapy is significant and appreciably higher than what has been previously reported.

e20605 Background: Intravenous (IV) fosaprepitant is a potent antiemetic, commonly used in patients receiving chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of IV fosaprepitant-associated infusion site adverse events (ISAEs) among a cohort of breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy at Mayo Rochester. Methods: A retrospective review of electronic medical record (EMR) data was performed for all patients who were initiated on AC chemotherapy from January 2011 to April 2012. Data collected from the EMR included baseline demographics, antiemetic regimen, documentation of ISAEs and type of IV access (peripheral vs. central). Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation or percentages) were summarized overall and by type of IV access and initially administered antiemetic. Results: 148 patients were included, with a median age of 54 years (range 28-76). 98 patients initially received IV fosaprepitant; 44 oral aprepitant; 6 neither. 132 (89%) initially had peripheral IV access and 16 (11%) had central venous access. Overall, 33 patients (34%) experienced an IV fosaprepitant associated ISAE including: erythema (n=22), pain (n=26), swelling (n=12), infusion site hives (n=5), extravasation (n=4), deep venous thrombosis (n=3), superficial thrombosis (n=7), phlebitis/thrombophlebitis (n=5), venous discoloration (n=1), venous engorgement (n=1), venous hardening/induration (n=4) and local scarring (n=1). Only 1 patient (2%) experienced an oral aprepitant associated ISAE, which was infusion site pain. This patient had previously had a fosaprepitant associated ISAE at the same site. All experienced ISAEs occurred in patients with peripheral IV access. Conclusions: The incidence and severity of ISAEs associated with IV fosaprepitant administration among a group of patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy is significant and is appreciably higher than what has been noted in other reports. The higher incidence observed is likely related to the predominance of peripheral venous access used in the studied cohort.

The purpose of this study was to explore whether cancer patients, who are actively receiving cancer therapy and who sometimes have only a few months to live, have anxieties or concerns that arise as a result of not being able to care for their pets during their illness or after their demise. A survey was developed and utilized among such patients to assess whether they had pet-related concerns and anxieties and to determine whether they desired more information on available pet-related resources. Three hundred nine patients completed the survey, and 170 (55%) had a pet(s). The majority described that their pets helped them during their cancer. Only 4% of all patients and 7% of the pet owners desired more information on community resources for pet care, and 80% of pet owners had family members who were already helping them with pet care. Cancer patients appear to benefit from their pets and report few pet-related concerns. Healthcare providers at other medical centers should consider determining whether their patients have needs and anxieties related to caring for their pets and whether educational efforts should be put forth to focus on such issues.

We conclude that the proposed optimization approach with regard to nursing resource assignment and workload balance throughout a day effectively improves patient service quality and staff satisfaction.

Without adequate safety measures, oral chemotherapy can lead to undetected dosing errors. The Mayo Clinic launched a project to ensure that all capecitabine and temozolomide prescriptions receive an independent double check.

These vivid data should motivate investigators to continue conducting clinical trials CINV and should remind healthcare providers about the importance of patient education on the availability of therapy for breakthrough symptomatology.

No abstract

No abstract