Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the real-world setting in Spain.

PURPOSE: Proper monitoring and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) with antiemetics is crucial for cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the use of antiemetics for the treatment of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) including carboplatin in the real-world setting in Spain. METHODS: A representative panel of cancer specialists was asked to collect information about the antiemetic treatments provided to patients receiving chemotherapy. Records formed part of the Global Oncology Monitor© database (Ipsos Healthcare, London, UK). Chemotherapy data were extrapolated using Ipsos Healthcare's projection methodology. RESULTS: A total of 73 experts were finally included. Data from 9519 patients, estimated to be representative of 202,084 patients, were collected. HEC (and carboplatin-based chemotherapy) was administered to 73,118 (36%) patients, cisplatin-based therapy being the most frequent treatment (n = 34,649, 47.38%). Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) alone or in combination were used as prophylaxis for CINV in 14,762 (20%) patients, while the combination of NK1RA with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RAs) and dexamethasone as recommended by the international guidelines was used in 5849 (8%) patients only. No antiemetic prophylaxis was administered to 8.46% of the patients receiving HEC (n = 6189). Physicians classified cisplatin-, anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC-), and carboplatin-based regimens as HEC in 63%, 22% and 4% of the cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of NK1RA-containing regimens for CINV prevention in patients treated with HEC was less than expected, suggesting poor adherence to international antiemetic guidelines.

SEOM clinical guidelines for anaemia treatment in cancer patients (2020).

Anaemia is defined by the presence of haemoglobin (Hb) levels < 13 g/dL in men and 12 g/dL in women. Up to 39% of cancer patients present it at the time of diagnosis and up to 40% have iron deficiency. Anaemia causes fatigue, functional deterioration and a reduction in the quality of life; it has also been associated with a poorer response to anti-tumour treatment and lower survival. Basic diagnostic tests for anaemia are simple and should be a routine part of clinical practice. These guidelines review the available evidence on the use of different therapies for treating anaemia: erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, iron supplements, and transfusion of blood products.

Evaluation of patient quality care in Spain in prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise current management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Spain, as well as professional adherence to antiemetic guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study. A multicenter has been designed including 360 patient case files from 18 hospitals. The involvement of pharmacists and nurses was studied, and also indicators of structure, process, and selected outcomes previously recruited from antiemetic guidelines. RESULTS: We found 94.4% of hospitals used a written protocol for managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and only 44.4% had educational programs for patients regarding this. Patients were prescribed antiemetic prophylactic treatment for delayed emesis in varying degree between highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (77.8% and 58.9%, respectively). Dexamethasone was the most prescribed antiemetic drug for patients receiving highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (98.3% and 90%, respectively), followed by ondansetron (68.9% and 95%, respectively). Nursing was more involved than pharmacy units in evaluating emetic risk factors in patients (64.7% vs 21.4%), and tracking symptom onset (88.2% vs 57.1%) and adherence to treatment (94.1% vs 28.6%). Pharmacy units were more involved than nursing in choosing the antiemetic treatment (78.6% vs 47%). CONCLUSIONS: Although antiemetic guidelines were used by all hospitals, there were differences in management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Increased education directed towards patients and oncology professionals is needed to improve adherence.

Breakthrough cancer pain: review and calls to action to improve its management.

In this paper, we review the current state of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) management. BTcP is a heterogeneous condition and a global problem for cancer patients. It is often managed suboptimally, which results in a negative outcome for patients, healthcare providers, and healthcare systems. Several barriers to the appropriate management of BTcP have been identified. These include, among others, an incomplete definition of BTcP, poor training of healthcare providers and patients alike, a lack of a multidisciplinary approach and the absence of specific protocols and tools. We provide some actions to help physicians and patients improve their approach to BTcP, including specific training, the design of easy-to-use tools for BTcP identification and assessment (such as checklists and pocket-sized cards), individualized treatment, and the use of multidisciplinary teams.

SEOM guide to antiemetic prophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy 2013.

Chemotherapy-induced emesis (CIE) both in the form of nausea and vomiting is one of the adverse effects most feared by patients who receive treatment, and one of the factors that most affect their quality of life and limit their functional capacity for everyday activities. Chemotherapy-induced emesis can result from many factors, depending on the treatment and the patients themselves. The best treatment for CIE is prevention, based on the use of drugs aimed at inhibiting the signal of certain neurotransmitters involved in the process. Antiemetic prophylaxis for chemotherapy of high-emetogenous potential lasting 1 day includes a combination of anti-5-HT3, neurokinin-1 inhibitors and dexamethasone. Antiemetic prophylaxis for chemotherapy of moderate-emetogenous potential lasting 1 day includes a combination of palonosetron and dexamethasone. Prophylaxis is not recommended for chemotherapy with minimal emetogenous potential. In the case of unforeseen or refractory emesis the use of olanzapine, metoclopramide or phenothiazine should be considered.

[Effectivity of cetuximab monotherapy in the treatment of refractory advanced cancer of the head and neck]. / Efectividad de Cetuximab en monoterapia en el tratamiento de cánceres de cabeza y cuello avanzado refractario.

INTRODUCTION: More than 90% of carcinoma of the head and neck (CHN) have an overexpression of the EGFR gene, and that overexpression is associated with a worse prognosis. Cetuximab is a monoclonal antibody against EGFR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have conducted a retrospective study of 10 consecutive cases with metastatic and/or recurrent CHN treated with cetuximab monotherapy as second line therapy, with the main objective of analyzing the progression-free survival (PFS); we also analyzed the response rate, the overall survival (OS), and toxicity profile as second end points. RESULTS: The median age was 55 years, and 100% of patients were males. Fourty percent of the patients received cetuximab as second line, and 60% as third line therapy. With a median follow-up of 13.5 months, the median PFS was 4 months (95%CI: 3.4-4.6 months), with a median OS of 9.7 months (95%CI: 2.9-16.6 months).The objective response rate was 10%, and the disease control rate was 60% (Partial response = 10% and stable disease for > 16 weeks = 50%). Thirty percent of patients had grade 3 rash. CONCLUSIONS: Cetuximab monotherapy has a modest effectivity in the treatment of refractory CHN, but with a limited toxicity. Future studies should use combinations of cetuximab with others effective chemotherapeutic drugs in the treatment of CHN, such as taxanes.

An epidemiological study of the perception of asthenia by oncologists in cancer patients: POA study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the high prevalence of asthenia in cancer patients, around 50-75%, and its impact on quality of life, it continues to be a difficult symptom to assess and manage. This study defines the extent of perception and diagnosis of asthenia associated with cancer among Spanish oncologists. METHODS: A descriptive, observational study conducted in Spain based on a five-part structured questionnaire available to participants through a private website. RESULTS: The 100 oncologists surveyed, most in the public healthcare setting, diagnose asthenia in 58-70% of cases. They consider old age (56.5%) and advanced-stage disease (94.2%) as factors associated with the occurrence of asthenia, which is also common in, particularly, tumours, such as pancreatic cancer (30.4%), and some therapies, notably chemotherapy alone (67%) or combined with radiotherapy (96%). Despite its adequate detection, physicians rarely ask their patients about asthenia, use instruments for its evaluation or assess its impact on quality of life. Likewise, only 40% of all patients are treated, although therapeutic intervention, a multidisciplinary approach combining drug and non-drug treatments and managing a variety of causative factors, can be considered adequate. Finally, 91.5% of those surveyed do not have action guidelines for asthenia in their hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Even when asthenia is widely diagnosed in cancer patients in Spain, there is a laxity in its assessment and treatment. Increased awareness among healthcare professionals of its impact and relevance is therefore required, as well as adequate protocols for its systematic detection and management within the routine assessment and treatment of cancer patients.