Assessing the impact of antiemetic guideline compliance on prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: Results of the nausea/emesis registry in oncology (NERO).

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based antiemetic guidelines offer predominantly consistent recommendations for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis. However, studies suggest that adherence to these recommendations is suboptimal. We explored inconsistencies between clinical practice and guideline-recommended treatment with a registry evaluating the effect of guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis (GCCP) on patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, non-interventional, multicentre study. The primary objective was to assess the overall (Days 1-5) complete response (CR: no emesis/no rescue use) rates in patients who received GCCP or guideline-inconsistent CINV prophylaxis (GICP) using diaries for 5 days following chemotherapy. Cycle 1 results are presented in patients who received either (1) anthracycline/cyclophosphamide (AC) highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), non-AC HEC or carboplatin, with GCCP for all these groups consisting of prophylaxis with an NK1 receptor antagonist (RA), 5-HT3RA and dexamethasone prior to chemotherapy or (2) moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), with GCCP consisting of a 5-HT3RA and dexamethasone prior to chemotherapy as per MASCC/ESMO 2016 guidelines, in place at the time of the study. RESULTS: 1,089 patients were part of the cycle 1 efficacy evaluation. Overall GCCP was 23%. CR rates were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in patients receiving GCCP (62.2%) versus GICP (52.6%) in the overall population, as well as in the subsets of patients receiving AC/non-AC HEC (60.2% versus 47.8%), MEC (73.8% versus 57.8%) and in those non-naïve to the chemotherapy received (65.9% versus 53.8%). No impact on daily living due to CINV (FLIE assessment) was observed in 43.4% patients receiving GCCP versus 28.5% GICP (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Consistent with prior studies, GCCP was very low; a significant benefit of almost 10% improved prevention of CINV was observed with GCCP. As per MASCC/ESMO guidelines, such an absolute difference should be practice changing. Comprehensive multifaceted strategies are needed to achieve better adherence to antiemetic guidelines.

Once-a-Day Trazodone in the Treatment of Depression in Routine Clinical Practice.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of once-a day trazodone tablets (Trittico Prolong® 300 mg) in patients with moderate to severe depression in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Men and women ≥18 years old with Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores > 21 and Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI/S) ≥4 were included in this post-authorization, non-interventional, observational prospective safety study, conducted in 8 psychiatric centers in the Czech -Republic. The acute treatment phase lasted 5 weeks: 1 week of titration and 4 weeks of full-dose treatment. Patients had follow-up visits 9 and 21 weeks after commencing -treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 85 patients were enrolled in the study, of which 80 completed the acute treatment of 5 weeks. There were significant decreases in the overall MADRS score from the baseline mean value of 27.4-21.2 at week 1 (p < 0.001), and a further decrease to 7.9 at week 5 (p < 0.001). The severity of depression according to CGI/S gradually declined. Most patients reported improvement after 6 days of trazodone treatment. The most frequent adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported were somnolence and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Trazodone, in the new extended-release formulation, had very good effects in clinical practice, both in previously untreated depressive episodes and in episodes not responsive to previous antidepressive therapy.