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

Pirri, Carlo; Katris, Paul; Trotter, James; Bayliss, Evan; Bennett, Robert M.; Drummond, Peter D.

doi:10.1007/s00520-010-0982-y

Cited by 67 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…51 Drug interactions between DOACs and chemotherapy agents and antiangiogenic therapies are a risk. P-glycoprotein transport and CYP3A4 metabolic pathways are inhibited by tyrosine-kinase inhibitors and hormonal therapies, and are induced by doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dexamethasone, 52 which might result in reduced responses to chemotherapy and an increased risk of bleeding by altering the serum concentration of DOACs.…”

Section: Early Maintenance (10 Days To 3 Months) and Long-term (Beyonmentioning

confidence: 99%

International clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Farge

Bounameaux

Brenner

et al. 2016

The Lancet Oncology

388

434

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer. These patients are at an increased risk of developing VTE and are more likely to have a recurrence of VTE and bleeding while taking anticoagulants. Management of VTE in patients with cancer is a major therapeutic challenge and remains suboptimal worldwide. In 2013, the International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer (ITAC-CME), established to reduce the global burden of VTE in patients with cancer, published international guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of VTE and central venous catheter-associated thrombosis. The rapid global adoption of direct oral anticoagulants for management of VTE in patients with cancer is an emerging treatment trend that needs to be addressed based on the current level of evidence. In this Review, we provide an update of the ITAC-CME consensus recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature ranked according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation scale. These guidelines aim to address in-hospital and outpatient cancer-associated VTE in specifi c subgroups of patients with cancer.

show abstract

Section: Early Maintenance (10 Days To 3 Months) and Long-term (Beyonmentioning

confidence: 99%

International clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Farge

Bounameaux

Brenner

et al. 2016

The Lancet Oncology

388

434

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, low emotional or role functioning, past history of morning sickness, anxiety, expectations for developing nausea/vomiting during chemotherapy or vestibular dysfunction have also been identified as key risk factors [31,37,50]. Further psychosocial factors need to be explored, as does the issue of whether the expectation of nausea and vomiting is correlated with its occurrence [19,35].…”

Section: Prognostic Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antiemetic research: future directions

Olver

Molassiotis

Aapro

et al. 2010

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose and methods As a part of reviewing the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) antiemetic guidelines in Perugia in 2009, an expert group identified directions for future antiemetic research. Results and conclusions In future trials, the prediction of nausea and vomiting may combine algorithms based on observed prognostic factors relating to the patient and the anticancer therapy, the identification of the genes that code for receptors, and pharmacogenetic studies of the metabolism of drugs. Design issues for future trials include standardising the emetic stimulus across studies and finding the minimum tolerated effective dose and schedule of an antiemetic. Also control of delayed emesis is not independent of the control of acute emesis. The full range of side effects and the impact on global quality of life scores should be part of the routine assessment of an antiemetic. With current high rates of control of acute vomiting, future trials will need to consider new primary endpoints such as nausea, a complex symptom, where improvement is needed. Economic endpoints should be incorporated to ascertain the cost benefit of antiemetic prophylaxis, taking into account the impact of nausea on work capacity. New antiemetic drugs may be targeted at different receptors, such as opioid, cannabinoid and peptide YY receptors. New research is needed into determining the extent of corticosteroid use. The emetic potential of a range of newer cytotoxics particularly when used in combinations and different scheduling, such as prolonged oral dosing of cytotoxics and use of targeted therapies, are all areas in need of research. More antiemetic studies are needed in niche areas such as in patients receiving high dose chemotherapy, radiation therapy or combined modality therapy. Further evidence of the efficacy of newer antiemetic agents is required in children.

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4] The introduction of the 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonist (5-HT RA) class of antiemetics, including ondansetron, granisetron, and dolasetron, more than 15 years ago greatly reduced treatment-related vomiting but not treatmentrelated nausea. 1,2,5 More recently, the use of palonosetron (Aloxi; MGI Pharma, Bloomington, MN), a second-generation 5-HT RA, and aprepitant (Emend; Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ), a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, has further increased control of emesis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of Delayed Nausea: A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program Study of Patients Receiving Chemotherapy

Roscoe

Heckler

Morrow

et al. 2012

JCO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial of the following four regimens for controlling delayed nausea (DN): group 1: palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine on days 2 and 3; group 2: granisetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine on days 2 and 3; group 3: aprepitant + palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with aprepitant + dexamethasone on days 2 and 3; and group 4: palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine + dexamethasone on days 2 and 3. Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients received doxorubicin, epirubicin, cisplatin, carboplatin, or oxaliplatin. The primary end point was average nausea assessed four times daily on days 2 and 3. Primary analyses were whether nausea control would be improved by using palonosetron versus granisetron on day 1 (group 1 v group 2); by adding dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 (group 1 v group 4); and by using aprepitant versus prochlorperazine (group 3 v group 4). Statistical significance was set at P = .017. Results Two hundred thirty-four, 234, 241, and 235 evaluable patients were accrued to groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Adjusted mean differences for the three planned analyses were as follows: palonosetron versus granisetron: −0.01 (95% CI, −0.23 to 0.20; P = .72); adding dexamethasone on days 2 and 3: 0.20 (95% CI, −0.02 to 0.41; P = .01); and using aprepitant versus prochlorperazine: −0.03 (95% CI, −0.24 to 0.19; P = .56). Conclusion The addition of dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 reduced DN. Palonosetron and granisetron have similar effects on DN. The beneficial effect of adding aprepitant for control of DN was the same as adding prochlorperazine.

show abstract

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

Cited by 67 publications

References 43 publications

International clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

International clinical practice guidelines including guidance for direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer

Antiemetic research: future directions

Prevention of Delayed Nausea: A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program Study of Patients Receiving Chemotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About