Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Más filtros

Métodos Terapéuticos y Terapias MTCI
Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Support Care Cancer ; 27(9): 3245-3252, 2019 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31119459

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) is a common side effect of radiotherapy and can affect up to 50-80% of patients, potentially causing detrimental effects to physical health, clinical efficacy, and patient quality of life. Antiemetic drugs act on receptors involved in the emesis pathway to block the uptake of neurotransmitters and inhibit stimulation of vomiting centers in the brain to prevent and treat RINV. The most commonly prescribed antiemetics for RINV are 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists (5-HT3 RA). Guidelines describing the optimal management of RINV are produced by the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer, the European Society of Medical Oncology, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. This review will present findings from research on antiemetic management for RINV conducted at our center. METHODS: A selective review of research conducted in a palliative outpatient radiotherapy clinic relating to antiemetic management for RINV was performed. RESULTS: Several studies investigating the efficacy of different routes of administration, new antiemetic drug types, and novel combinations of antiemetics have been tested at our clinic to elucidate which approach provides the best response. These include studies on the use of ondansetron rapidly dissolving film, palonosetron, and the addition of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist to traditional 5-HT3 RA regimens. CONCLUSIONS: These studies provide a framework for future research and could potentially inform changes to future guidelines to include the use of these novel regimens and techniques.


Asunto(s)
Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Náusea/prevención & control , Antagonistas del Receptor de Neuroquinina-1/uso terapéutico , Radioterapia/efectos adversos , Agonistas del Receptor de Serotonina 5-HT3/uso terapéutico , Vómitos/prevención & control , Adulto , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria , Humanos , Oncología Médica , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Ondansetrón/uso terapéutico , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Palonosetrón/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Antagonistas de la Serotonina/uso terapéutico
2.
Support Care Cancer ; 27(3): 783-791, 2019 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30607675

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) can affect 50-80% of patients undergoing radiotherapy and negatively impacts quality of life. This review aimed to compare the most recent RINV antiemetic guidelines produced by the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), the European Society of Clinical Oncology (ESMO), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Future improvements to the guidelines and the need for further research in RINV were also discussed. METHODS: Antiemetic guidelines produced by MASCC/ESMO, ASCO, and NCCN were examined to identify similarities, differences, and inadequacies within the guidelines. RESULTS: Areas of dissension within the guidelines include the addition of dexamethasone to moderate-risk antiemetic regimens, the prophylactic treatment of RINV in the low-risk categories, and the appropriate treatment for breakthrough emesis. The guidelines are in accordance that high-risk radiotherapy regimens should be treated prophylactically with a serotonin receptor antagonist and for those undergoing concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy, antiemetic treatment should be prescribed according to the emetic risk associated with their respective chemotherapy regimen. Low- and minimal-risk recommendations are based on low-level evidence and informal consensus. CONCLUSION: RINV is a frequent and distressing side effect of radiotherapy and requires further research to establish effective antiemetic guidelines and ensure optimal treatment outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Eméticos/uso terapéutico , Náusea/prevención & control , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Vómitos/prevención & control , Consenso , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Náusea/etiología , Calidad de Vida , Radioterapia/efectos adversos , Investigación , Factores de Riesgo , Antagonistas de la Serotonina/uso terapéutico , Vómitos/etiología
3.
Support Care Cancer ; 27(1): 87-95, 2019 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30284039

RESUMEN

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common toxicity that may impair the quality of life of patients with a variety of early- and end-stage malignancies. In light of recent changes in the optimal management of CINV, we undertook this narrative review to compare the latest guidelines published by ASCO (2017), NCCN (2018), and MASCC/ESMO (2016). The processes undertaken by each organization to evaluate existing literature were also described. Although ASCO, NCCN, and MASCC/ESMO guidelines for the treatment and prevention of CINV share many fundamental similarities, literature surrounding low and minimal emetic risk regimens is lacking. Data regarding the use of complementary alternative medicine for CINV is particularly scarce and in need of further investigation.


Asunto(s)
Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Náusea/inducido químicamente , Náusea/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Vómitos/inducido químicamente , Vómitos/terapia , Adulto , Humanos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Calidad de Vida , Sociedades Médicas/normas
4.
Ann Palliat Med ; 6(Suppl 2): S209-S214, 2017 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29156899

RESUMEN

Chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain is a distressing and commonly occurring side effect of many commonly used chemotherapeutic agents, which in some cases may prevent cancer patients from being able to complete their treatment. Cannabinoid based therapies have the potential to manage or even prevent pain associated with this syndrome. Pre-clinical animal studies that investigate the modulation of the endocannabinoid system (endogenous cannabinoid pathway) are being conducted to better understand the mechanisms behind this phenomenon. Five recent pre-clinical studies identified from Medline published between 2013 and 2016 were selected for review. All studies evaluated the effect of small-molecule agonists or antagonists on components of the endocannabinoid system in rats or mice, using cisplatin or paclitax-el-induced allodynia as a model of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain. Activation of the cannabinoid receptor-2 (CB-2) receptor by AM1710 blocked paclitaxel-induced mechanical and cold allodynia in one study. Four studies investigating the activation of both cannabinoid receptor-1 (CB-1) and CB-2 receptors by dual-agonists (WIN55,21 and CP55,940), or by the introduction of inhibitors of endocannabinoid metabolisers (URB597, URB937, JZL184, and SA-57) showed reduction of chemotherapy-induced al-lodynia. In addition, their results suggest that anti-allodynic effects may also be mediated by additional receptors, including TRPV1 and 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT1A). Pre-clinical studies demon-strate that the activation of endocannabinoid CB-1 or CB-2 receptors produces physiological effects in animal models, namely the reduction of chemotherapy-induced allodynia. These studies also provide in-sight into the biological mechanism behind the therapeutic utility of cannabis compounds in managing chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain, and provide a basis for the conduct of future clinical studies in patients of this population.


Asunto(s)
Endocannabinoides/fisiología , Neuralgia/fisiopatología , Animales , Antineoplásicos/toxicidad , Agonistas de Receptores de Cannabinoides/farmacología , Antagonistas de Receptores de Cannabinoides/farmacología , Cisplatino/toxicidad , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Endocannabinoides/agonistas , Endocannabinoides/antagonistas & inhibidores , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Hiperalgesia/fisiopatología , Ratones , Neuralgia/inducido químicamente , Paclitaxel/toxicidad , Ratas , Transducción de Señal
5.
Ann Palliat Med ; 6(1): 14-25, 2017 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28061531

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have observed how the time of radiotherapy delivery can impact toxicities and outcomes. The goal of this study was to determine whether treatment time influenced radiotherapy response for bone metastases. METHODS: Patients who received radiation treatment to painful bone metastases from January 2000 to December 2010 were included in our analysis. Demographic and treatment information including performance status, primary site, treatment dose and fraction, and response were collected prospectively. Treatment times were extracted from patient medical records. Patients were allocated to 8:00 AM-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, or 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts based on their treatment times. To compare treatment response between the three cohorts, the Fisher exact test was used. A two-sided P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analysis was repeated with males and females separately. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included. The median age was 68 years and 55.5% of patients responded to treatment. The dose and fraction of radiation received differed significantly between treatment cohorts using all allocation methods. Females in the 11:01 AM-2:00 PM cohort exhibited a significantly higher response rate (P=0.02) and differing proportions of response types (P=0.03) compared to the 8:00 AM- 11:00 AM and 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts when allocated using all treatment times. No significant differences in response were seen between cohorts when all patients were analysed together or analysed for males only. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment time may affect response in female patients receiving radiotherapy for painful bone metastases. Subsequent chronotherapy studies in radiation should investigate these gender differences.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Dolor en Cáncer/radioterapia , Cronoterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias Óseas/complicaciones , Neoplasias Óseas/secundario , Dolor en Cáncer/etiología , Ritmo Circadiano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores Sexuales , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
6.
Ann Palliat Med ; 5(4): 267-279, 2016 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27806623

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is commonly used to treat brain metastases. Previous studies have explored how radiotherapy treatment time can affect response. The present study evaluated the influence of treatment time on overall survival (OS) for cancer patients receiving WBRT. METHODS: Patients who received WBRT from 2004 to 2016 were included. Demographic information including age, performance status, primary site, dose, fraction, treatment time, and date of death were collected. Based on different percentages of treatment times falling into one time frame (i.e., 100%, ≥80%, ≥70%, or ≥60%), patients were allocated to three cohorts (8:00-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, 2:01-5:00 PM). Demographics were compared among cohorts using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and Fisher exact test. To control the multiple comparisons on select demographic variables a Bonferroni adjusted P value was considered statistically significant. Kaplan-Meier curves were created for OS. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard (PH) model were used to find predictive factors of OS in all patients, females and males. RESULTS: A total of 755 patients were included with a median age of 66 years. The actuarial median OS was 2.37 months. Treatment time was not associated with OS for all patients or males only. In elderly female patients (>65 years), a significant difference in OS was found among treatment cohorts (P=0.02). Treatment time (when ≥80% or ≥70% of treatment times were in one time frame), age, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) were significant predictive factors of OS in univariate analysis for females. Only age and KPS remained significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Time of WBRT delivery for brain metastases was significantly related to OS upon univariate analyses in females only. Future investigations should be conducted prospectively with homogenous patient groups to elucidate the effect of chronotherapy in palliative brain metastases patients as time of WBRT administration may affect OS in specific subsets of patients.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas/radioterapia , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Neoplasias Encefálicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Cronoterapia/métodos , Cronoterapia/mortalidad , Irradiación Craneana/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Estudios Retrospectivos , Distribución por Sexo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA