Antiemetic prophylaxis regimens in haematologic malignancies patients undergoing a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Which is the best standard of care? A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review, adhering to PRISMA guidelines, aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antiemetic prophylaxis in haematological patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy as part of their hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) conditioning regimens. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane database to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of antiemetic prophylaxis. Studies in English, French, Italian or Spanish were included. This review is registered with PROSPERO, ID CRD42023406380. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were analysed. The antiemetic regimens evaluated ranged from monotherapy with 5-Hydroxytryptamine Receptor 3 antagonists (5-HT3RAs) to complex combinations including olanzapine, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, 5-HT3RAs and corticosteroids. Complete response rates for triplet or quadruple regimens varied between 23.5% and 81.9%. Although no significant adverse effects were observed, minor symptoms such as diarrhoea, constipation, sedation and headaches were reported. CONCLUSION: Existing evidence on HSCT antiemetic therapy highlights its benefits but fails to provide clear clinical directions. The choice between triplet and quadruplet therapies for different patient scenarios is still uncertain. Until more detailed research is available, healthcare providers must rely on the latest guidelines and their judgement to customise antiemetic care for each patient's specific needs and risks.

Risk factors for nausea and vomiting requiring the daily administration of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in radiotherapy combined with temozolomide for high-grade glioma.

Radiotherapy combined with temozolomide (TMZ+RT) is the primary treatment for high-grade glioma. TMZ is classified as a moderate emetic risk agent and, thus, supportive care for nausea and vomiting is important. In Nagoya University Hospital, all patients are treated with a 5-hydroxy-tryptamine 3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) for the first 3 days. The daily administration of 5-HT3RA is resumed after the 4th day based on the condition of patients during TMZ+RT. Therefore, the present study investigated risk factors for nausea and vomiting in patients requiring the daily administration of 5-HT3RA. Patients with high-grade glioma who received TMZ+RT between January 2014 and December 2019 at our hospital were included. Patients were divided into two groups: a control group (patients who did not resume 5-HT3RA) and resuming 5-HT3RA group (patients who resumed 5-HT3RA after the 4th day), and both groups were compared to identify risk factors for nausea and vomiting during TMZ+RT. There were 78 patients in the control group (68%) and 36 in the resuming 5-HT3RA group (32%). A multivariate analysis of patient backgrounds in the two groups identified age <18 years, PS 2 or more, and occipital lobe tumors as risk factors for nausea and vomiting. Nausea and vomiting were attenuated in 30 patients (83%) in the resuming 5-HT3RA group following the resumption of 5-HT3RA. The results obtained highlight the importance of extracting patients with these risk factors before the initiation of therapy and the early resumption or daily administration of 5-HT3RA according to the condition of each patient.

Ventricular Fibrillation Arrest Triggered by Antiemetics Revealing an Underlying Long QT Syndrome in a Young Woman.

Undiagnosed phenomena such as long QT syndrome can have devastating effects on patients. Our case, involving a woman in her 30s, highlights the serious effects of undiagnosed long QT and how antiemetic medications can precipitate cardiac events that can lead to fatalities. Various medications are known to prolong QT intervals, and clinicians must be aware of the side effects of some of these commonly used medications. While survival was achieved in this case, education and reflection can act as a tool to help improve global standards of care in this subgroup of the population.

Anti-Emetics in Children Receiving Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors and Leukemia: Pharmacology and Optimization of Therapy for Nausea and Vomiting.

The management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children remains challenging due to differences in the chemotherapy regimens, their relative emetogenicity compared to that in adults and differences in drug metabolism and the available formulations. The common four classes of anti-emetics used for the treatment and prophylaxis of CINV in children include dexamethasone, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3RAs), and olanzapine. The appropriate dose of dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis in children is unknown, with a significant variability in dosage ranging between 6 and 32 mg/m2/day. The dose of dexamethasone is decreased by 30% when this drug is combined with (fos)aprepitant in children, in contrast to a decrease of 50% required in adults. The use of aprepitant in younger children (<12 years) is often hampered by the non-availability of oral suspension formulations in many countries; alternatively, 80 mg capsules are administered for 1-3 days in certain institutes to children weighing between 15 and 40 kg. Among the different 5HT3RAs, palonosetron is comparatively metabolized faster in children than in adults, requiring a higher dosage for similar efficacy to that achieved in adults. Olanzapine is a newer agent, used in doses between 0.1 and 0.14 mg/kg/day in children, with good anti-emetic efficacy, but has sedation and hyperglycemia as concerning adverse effects. Drug interactions between anti-emetics and between anti-emetics and chemotherapy/supportive agents (azole antifungals, cyclosporine, arsenic trioxide), especially QTc prolongation, should be considered during prescription.

Outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis among pediatric cancer patients receiving moderate to highly emetogenic chemotherapy at pediatric hemato-oncology ward of Tikur Anbessa specialized hospital: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major issue for chemotherapy pediatric patients, especially in developing countries due to limited access to essential antiemetics. This study aimed to assess antiemetic prophylaxis outcomes in pediatric cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. METHODS: A longitudinal prospective observational study design was conducted among 201 pediatric cancer patients followed up to 120 h post-chemotherapy. RESULTS: The majority of patients (75.1%) received combination prophylactic antiemetics in the acute phase. Complete response (CR) was the highest in the acute phase (71.1%). Emesis episodes occurred most frequently on the first day of treatment (28.4%) and gradually decreased over time. History of motion sickness, platinum-based chemotherapy, and prior chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) were associated with emesis during the acute phase whereas multiple-day chemotherapy, prior CIV, receipt of antiemetics, and a history of motion sickness in the delayed phase. However, the odds of CIV were reduced with steroid presence in the chemotherapy regimen. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of participants could not achieve a CR. It is important for clinicians to be cognizant of risk factors that influence the outcome of antiemetic prophylaxis to achieve better control of CINV among pediatric cancer patients.

A nurse-led multidomain intervention to improve the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with head and neck cancers: A randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the effect of a nurse-led multidomain intervention on chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). METHODS: Ninety-two HNSCC patients who received cisplatin-based chemotherapy were divided into intervention group (n = 45) and control group (n = 47). The control group received usual care of CINV, which consisted of administration of antiemetics according to physicians' preference, education about CINV control and dietary recommendations provided by primary nurses. The intervention group received nurse-led, evidence-based multidomain management, including nurse-led CINV risk factors assessment, education on prevention and control of CINV, antiemetics following guidelines, dietary strategies, and relaxation therapy. The number of patients who experienced CINV was collected. The severity of CINV was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0. The influence of CINV on patient's quality of life was assessed by the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). RESULTS: The incidence and the severity of nausea and vomiting in the intervention group were significantly lower than those in the control group within 5 days after chemotherapy, and the scores of the dimension of nausea and vomiting in the intervention group were significantly higher than those in the control group [63.00 (50.00-63.00) vs 40.00(28.00-63.00), 63.00(63.00-63.00) vs 63.00 (43.00-63.00)], the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-led multidomain intervention can reduce the incidence and the severity of CINV in patients with HNSCC who were treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and thus reduced the influence of CINV on patients' quality of life. THE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05792228.

MASCC 2023 Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements: an evidence-based and consensus resource for patients.

PURPOSE: The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Patient Antiemetic Guideline Committee aimed to (1) adapt the updated evidence-based, clinical guidelines to patient-centered antiemetic guidelines and (2) develop patient education materials and statements. METHODS: The MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines were created and reviewed by antiemetic experts and patient advocates by incorporating the 2023 MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines into patient-friendly language. Patient Education Statements were developed based on current literature and by utilizing an expert modified Delphi consensus (≥ 75% agreement). Patient advocate/focus group input and patient survey results were further integrated into Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines and Education Statements. RESULTS: Patient-Centered Antiemetic Guidelines were created using patient-friendly language and visual slides. Patient-friendly language was also utilized to communicate the Educational Statements. Key content categories identified for the Educational Statements included the following: nausea/vomiting definitions, causes, risk factors, categories, complications, accompanying symptoms, prophylactic antiemetic treatment, general management, when to call/what to ask the healthcare team, what caregivers can do, and available resources. All identified content met the ≥ 75% expert agreement threshold. Fifteen (15) items demonstrated 100% agreement, 11 items achieved ≥ 90% agreement, and three content items demonstrated 80 ~ 82% agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The inaugural MASCC 2023 Patient Antiemetic Guidelines can help patients and caregivers understand the prevention of nausea and vomiting related to their cancer treatment. Educational Statements provide further patient information. Educating patients on how to utilize guideline antiemetics and the education statements can contribute improvements in the control of anticancer treatment-related nausea and vomiting.

Cyclic vomiting syndrome: Future clinical and research priorities for: Special supplement/proceedings of 3rd international symposium.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of studies have explored the clinical features, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). CVS is common in adults and children and negatively impacts patients, families, and the healthcare system. A related condition, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS), has been a focus of interest in the lay press and published literature. PURPOSE: Clinical presentations of CVS have been defined by small series and expert opinion, but recent prospective studies are refining our understanding of the spectrum of emetic episodes and the breadth of comorbid conditions. Large cross-sectional population analyses are clarifying CVS prevalence and factors related to age, ethnicity, and geographic region. CVS pathophysiology is multifactorial with contributions from migraines, dysautonomia, endogenous cannabinoids, mitochondrial dysfunction, genetic abnormalities, and rapid gastric emptying. CVS treatment relies on antiemetics and antimigraine therapies to abort acute episodes coupled with prophylactic regimens employing neuromodulators and antiepileptics. CHS represents a challenge partly because of difficulties in achieving sustained cannabis abstinence. Benefits of other therapies in CHS remain poorly defined. Several areas warrant further scrutiny including better identification of CVS triggers and characterization of different CVS subsets including those with frequent severe episodes, refined description of epidemiology to allow targeting of populations predisposed to CVS development, rigorous definition of pathogenic factors to provide a foundation for exploratory studies of novel therapies, and conduct of controlled trials by multicenter collaborations to confirm benefits of existing and new therapies in development. Progress in these areas will be facilitated by generous governmental and industry support.

The prophylactic antiemetic therapies in management of differentiated thyroid cancer patients with radioactive iodine therapy: a single-center, non-randomized clinical trial.

Objective: The present study was to investigate three different single-drug regimens to show which was more effective to reduce radioactive iodine therapy (RAI) associated nausea and vomiting, and to compare the occurrence of long-term gastrointestinal diseases after RAI therapy. Method: We performed a single-center, non-randomized clinical trial among patients who underwent RAI therapy from March 2016 to July 2022. Enrolled patients were divided into four cohorts based on the date of the treatment. cohort 1, with no preventive antiemetics; cohort 2, received 20 mg of pantoprazole per day for 3 days; cohort 3, received a 10 mg metoclopramide tablet two times daily for 3 days; cohort 4, oral ondansetron, 8 mg, twice daily for 3 days. The primary endpoints were proportion of patients who experience vomiting episodes and nausea during the 7-day hospital period. Secondary end points included Functional Living Index Emesis (FLIE) quality-of life questionnaires and the occurrence of gastrointestinal diseases. Results: A total of 1755 patients were analyzed, comprised of 1299 (74.0%) women and 456 (26.0%) men, with a median age of 44 years (range 18-78 years). The characteristics of patient were similar within the four groups. 465 (26.4%) patients developed RAI-associated nausea, and 186 (14.4%) patients developed RAI-associated vomiting. The rate of nausea was significantly decreased in the patients who were taking ondansetron when compared with the other cohorts (P<0.05), while the rate of vomiting (≥6 episodes) was slightly lower. As secondary endpoint, FLIE measures ondansetron scored highly compared to other cohorts, from baseline (mean score of 110.53 ± 17.54) to day 7 (mean score of 105.56 ± 12.48). In addition, 48 (2.7%) patients were found to be with gastrointestinal diseases at the end of one year follow up. Multiple RAI therapy and higher dose of I-131 per body weight revealed a significantly independent risk factors of developing gastrointestinal disorders. Conclusions: In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that short-term ondansetron could be an effective prophylactic agent in controlling RAI-associated nausea and vomiting. Furthermore, the risk of developing gastrointestinal disorders was significantly higher for patients with multiple RAI therapy and higher dose of I-131 per body weight.

2020 ASCO, 2023 NCCN, 2023 MASCC/ESMO, and 2019 CCO: a comparison of antiemetic guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common toxicity that may impair the quality of life of patients with various malignancies ranging from early to end stages. In light of frequent changes to the guidelines for optimal management of CINV, we undertook this narrative review to compare the most recent guidelines published by ASCO (2020), NCCN (2023), MASCC/ESMO (2023), and CCO (2019). The processes undertaken by each organization to evaluate existing literature were also described. Although ASCO, NCCN, MASCC/ESMO, and CCO guidelines for the treatment and prevention of CINV share many fundamental similarities, the literature surrounding low and minimal emetic risk regimens is lacking. Current data regarding adherence to these guidelines is poor and warrants further investigation to improve care.

The antiemetic actions of GIP receptor agonism.

Nausea and vomiting are primitive aspects of mammalian physiology and behavior that ensure survival. Unfortunately, both are ubiquitously present side effects of drug treatments for many chronic diseases with negative consequences on pharmacotherapy tolerance, quality of life, and prognosis. One of the most critical clinical examples is the profound emesis and nausea that occur in patients undergoing chemotherapy, which continue to be among the most distressing side effects, even with the use of modern antiemetic medications. Similarly, antiobesity/diabetes medications that target the glucagon-like peptide-1 system, despite their remarkable metabolic success, also cause nausea and vomiting in a significant number of patients. These side effects hinder the ability to administer higher dosages for optimal glycemic and weight management and represent the major reasons for treatment discontinuation. Our inability to effectively control these side effects highlights the need to anatomically, molecularly, and functionally characterize novel neural substrates that drive and inhibit nausea and emesis. Here, we discuss clinical and preclinical evidence that highlights the glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide receptor system as a novel therapeutic central target for the management of nausea and emesis.

Retrospective analysis of real-world prescribing data for managing cisplatin-based chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in China.

BACKGROUND: The current utilization of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1RAs) and the impact of updated guidelines on prescription patterns of antiemetic drugs among Chinese patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) remain undetermined. This study aims to analyze the present situation of Chinese cancer patients using antiemetic drugs and assess the appropriateness of antiemetic regimens. METHODS: Prescription data were collected between January 2015 and December 2020 from cancer patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy at 76 hospitals in six major cities in China. Trends in the use of antiemetic drugs, prescribing patterns and adherence to antiemetic guidelines were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 108,611 patients included in this study, 6 classes and 17 antiemetic drugs were identified as monotherapy or combination therapy in 93,872 patients (86.4%), whereas 14,739 patients (13.6%) were administered no antiemetic treatment. 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3RAs) and glucocorticoids were the two most frequently used classes of antiemetics, followed by metoclopramide. NK1RAs were underused across the six cities, only 9332 (8.6%) and 1655 (1.5%) cisplatin-based treatments were prescribed aprepitant and fosaprepitant, respectively. Prescriptions of olanzapine and lorazepam were very low throughout the study period. In prescribing patterns of antiemetic drugs, dual combination regimens were the most common (40.0%), followed by triple combination therapy and monotherapy (25.8% and 15.1%, respectively). Overall, the adherence to antiemetic guidelines for patients undergoing cisplatin-based regimens was only 8.1% due to inadequate prescription of antiemetic drugs. Finally, our study also revealed that 5-HT3RAs and glucocorticoids were overprescribed in 8.8% and 1.6% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current study reveals suboptimal utilization of recommended antiemetic drugs for managing cisplatin-based HEC-induced nausea and vomiting in China. Improving the management of CINV is crucial, and these findings provide valuable insights into optimizing antiemetic drug practices.

Management of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan-related nausea and vomiting in real-world practice.

Background: Nausea and vomiting are common side effects of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan (T-DXd), but guidelines for optimal management were not initially available. This retrospective single-center study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of two antiemetic regimens in patients receiving T-DXd. Methods: Data from metastatic breast cancer patients receiving T-DXd were collected. Two groups were defined: patients treated with 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (RA) ± dexamethasone (5-HT3-group) and patients treated with a fixed oral combination of netupitant (NK1RA) and palonosetron ± dexamethasone (NK1 group). Physicians preferentially offered the NK1 regimen to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting based on internal recommendations. Only nausea and vomiting during cycles 1 and 2 were considered. Comparisons of nausea and vomiting by the antiemetic prophylaxis group were assessed using chi-square. Results: A total of 53 patients were included in the analysis. At cycle 1, 72% and 28% of patients received the 5-HT3 and NK1 prophylaxis, respectively. Overall, 58% reported nausea, with no differences between groups (58% vs. 60%; p = 0.832), but with a trend for lower grade in the NK1 group (33.3% G1; 26.7% G2) compared to the 5-HT3 group (23.7% G1; 31.6% G2; 2.6% G3). Vomiting was reported by 21% and 0% of patients in the 5-HT3 and the NK1 group, respectively (p = 0.054). Among the 15 patients in the 5-HT3 group with nausea at cycle 1 who escalated to NK1 at cycle 2, nausea decreased from 100% to 53% (p = 0.022) and vomiting decreased from 47% to 13% (p = 0.046). Conclusions: The NK1 regimen improved vomiting control at cycle 1 and, when introduced at cycle 2, significantly improved both nausea and vomiting. The biased NK1 selection for higher-risk patients may have dampened the differences between groups at cycle 1. These findings support enhanced control of T-DXd-related nausea and vomiting with NK1RA.

Sedative and cardiorespiratory effects of dexmedetomidine alone or combined with acepromazine in healthy cats.

The purpose of this study was to assess sedation, emesis and cardiovascular effects of dexmedetomidine alone or combined with acepromazine in healthy cats. Fourteen male cats aged 0.9 ± 0.5 years and weighing 3.7 ± 0.7 kg were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups: GD, dexmedetomidine 5 µg/kg; and GDA, dexmedetomidine 5 µg/kg with acepromazine 0.03 mg/kg, all intramuscularly. Measurements were recorded at baseline, at 20 minutes and then at 10-minute intervals following sedation and included heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (FR), systolic arterial pressure (SAP), rectal temperature (RT), number of episodes of emesis and sedation score (0-4). Data were compared using ANOVA for repeated measures followed by Sídák and Dunnet test. Sedation scores were compared between groups at T20 using Mann-Whitney test. Significance was considered when P <0.05. At T20, HR was significantly lower in GDA (99 ± 14 beats/min) compared with GD (133 ± 19 beats/min) and SAP was significantly lower in both groups compared with baseline (126 ± 14 vs. 148 ± 26 and 111 ± 13 vs. 144 ± 17 mmHg in GD and GDA, respectively). Duration of sedation was similar between groups, although sedation scores differed significantly at T20, with 1 (0-4) in GD and 4 (4-4) in GDA. More episodes of emesis were recorded in GD compared with GDA. The combination of dexmedetomidine and acepromazine produced more profound sedation with faster onset and lower incidence of emesis compared with dexmedetomidine alone in healthy cats.

Exploring the role of ghrelin and des-acyl ghrelin in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Ghrelin and its mimetics have been shown to reduce cisplatin-induced emesis in preclinical studies using ferrets and shrews. This study investigated the effectiveness of ghrelin and des-acyl ghrelin (DAG) in antagonizing cisplatin-induced emesis and physiological changes indicative of nausea in Suncus murinus. Animals implanted with radiotelemetry devices were administered ghrelin (0.2, 1.0, and 5.0 µg/day), DAG (0.2, 1.0, and 5.0 µg/day), or saline (14 µL/day) intracerebroventricularly 4 days before and 3 days after treatment with cisplatin (30 mg/kg). At the end, the anti-apoptotic potentials of ghrelin and DAG were assessed by measuring Bax expression and cytochrome C activity. Neurotransmitter changes in the brain were evaluated using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. Ghrelin and DAG reduced cisplatin-induced emesis in the delayed (24-72 h) but not the acute phase (0-24 h) of emesis. Ghrelin also partially reversed the inhibitory effects of cisplatin on food intake without affecting gastrointestinal myoelectrical activity or causing hypothermia; however, ghrelin or DAG did not prevent these effects. Ghrelin and DAG could attenuate the cisplatin-induced upregulation of Bax and cytochrome C in the ileum. Cisplatin dysregulated neurotransmitter levels in the frontal cortex, amygdala, thalamus, hypothalamus, and brainstem, and this was partially restored by low doses of ghrelin and DAG. Our findings suggest that ghrelin and DAG exhibit protective effects against cisplatin-induced delayed emesis. The underlying antiemetic mechanism may involve GHSR and/or unspecified pathways that modulate the neurotransmitters involved in emesis control in the brain and an action to attenuate apoptosis in the gastrointestinal tract.

Asenapine versus olanzapine for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer: A retrospective study.

AIM: Patients with cancer often experience nausea and vomiting (N/V), but may have difficulty using olanzapine (OLZ), a common antiemetic. Asenapine (ASE) is a multi-acting receptor-targeted antipsychotic like OLZ, although there is little evidence that ASE serves as an antiemetic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of ASE compared to those of OLZ for the treatment of N/V in patients with cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study involved patients who received 5 mg ASE, 5 mg OLZ, or 2.5 mg OLZ for 2 days. Daily worst N/V was rated on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (very much). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who had a response, defined as any reduction in N/V score. A complete response (CR) was defined as a score reduction to 0. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients with CR and adverse events. RESULTS: Between April 2017 and March 2023, 212 patients were enrolled to receive treatment: 5 mg ASE (n = 34), 5 mg OLZ (n = 102), or 2.5 mg OLZ (n = 76). No significant differences in response rates (52.9% vs. 58.8% vs. 52.6%, p = 0.671) or secondary endpoints were observed between the groups. Patients receiving ASE were more likely to experience oral hypoesthesia (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This preliminary study suggests that ASE may be effective for N/V. Further studies are required to confirm these findings.

Jelly snakes to reduce early postoperative vomiting in children after adenotonsillectomy: The randomized controlled snakes trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the use of dual antiemetic agents, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurs in an unacceptably large number of patients post-tonsillectomy. There has been increased interest in alternative and non-pharmacological treatments for PONV e.g., chewing gum. We investigated if chewing a large confectionary jelly snake had prophylactic antiemetic effects postoperatively in young children. METHODS: Prospective, open-label randomised controlled trial of 240 patients, 2-16 years. Patients administered a confectionary jelly snake to chew postoperatively were compared with a control group. The primary outcome was the number of episodes of vomiting within 6 h of the operation on an intention-to-treat basis. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: incidence of nausea, vomiting at 6 and 24 h, rescue antiemetic use, acceptability, delayed discharge. RESULTS: 233 patients were randomised to receive the confectionary snake (snake group, 118) or standard care (control group, 115). The number of vomiting episodes in 6 h was similar between groups on an intention-to-treat basis, with 39 episodes across 22 (19%) patients in the control group and 31 across 19 (16%) patients in the snake group (p = 0.666). From post anaesthetic care unit until 24 h there was no difference in doses of antiemetics or delayed discharge due to PONV. A secondary as per protocol analysis did not change this result. CONCLUSIONS: Chewing of confectionery jelly snakes within one hour of waking following adenotonsillectomy with vapour-maintained anaesthesia and two prophylactic antiemetics did not further reduce the incidence of early vomiting. REGISTRATION: prospective registration at the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618000637246).

Rational analysis of the use of antiemetic drugs in tumor chemotherapy patients in our hospital / 中国药房

OBJECTIVE To provide reference for the rational use of antiemetic drugs in tumor chemotherapy patients. METHODS The data of tumor patients who were given antiemetic drugs were collected from 9 departments of our hospital with hospital information system from Oct. 1st to Nov. 30th in 2022， such as oncology department， radiotherapy department， gynecology department， and gastroenterology department. The application of chemotherapy drugs and the use of antiemetic drugs were analyzed statistically， and the irrational use of antiemetic drugs was analyzed. RESULTS A total of 520 patients were included， involving 248 （47.69%） using chemotherapy drugs with a moderate emetogenic risk level and 135 （25.96%） with a high emetogenic risk level. A total of 461 cases （73.06%） of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3-receptor antagonists were used， including palonosetron in 333 cases， ondansetron in 106 cases， tropisetron in 15 cases and granisetron in 7 cases， and only 148 cases of patients were prioritized for the use of nationally procured medicines and national essential medicines （32.10%）. Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists were used in 170 cases （26.94%）， including fosaprepitant in 112 cases and aprepitant in 58 cases. The use of antiemetic drugs was unreasonable in 162 patients （31.15%）； among the types of irrational drugs， the antiemetic regimen was unreasonable in the largest number of cases （22.40%）， followed by the irrational pharmacoeconomics （19.13%）. CONCLUSIONS The emetogenic risk levels of chemotherapy drugs used for tumor patients in our hospital are primarily moderate to high， and there is irrational use of antiemetic regimen and pharmacoeconomics. Clinicians， nurses， pharmacists and hospital departments should collaborate as multiple teams to strengthen full supervision of the standardization of antiemetic drugs， reasonably select antiemetic drugs based on emetogenicity rating， and improve the compliance of doctors with the guidelines to ensure the safety， effectiveness， and cost-effective of patient medication.