Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: ADVICE (Actual Data of Vomiting Incidence by Chemotherapy Evaluation) study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the incidence of nausea and vomiting (CINV) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), under medical practice conditions and the accuracy with which physicians perceive CINV. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients receiving MEC between April 2012 and May 2013 were included. Patients completed a diary of the intensity of nausea and number of vomiting episodes. Complete response and complete protection were assessed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Of 261 patients included, 240 were evaluated. Median age was 64 years, 44.2 % were female and 11.2 % were aged less than 50 years; 95.3 % of patients received a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) antagonist + corticosteroid as antiemetic treatment. Vomiting within 5 days of chemotherapy administration occurred in 20.8 %, nausea in 42 % and significant nausea in 23.8 % of patients. An increase in the percentage of patients with significant nausea (from 9.4 to 21.7 %) and vomiting (from 9.2 to 16.5 %) was observed from the acute to the delayed phase. Complete response was 84.2 % in the acute phase, 77 % in the late phase and 68.9 % in overall period. Complete protection was 79.5 % in the acute phase, 68.8 % in the late phase and 62.4 % throughout the study period. Physicians estimated prophylaxis would be effective for 75 % of patients receiving MEC, compared with 54.1 % obtained from patients' diary. CONCLUSION: Despite receiving prophylactic treatment, 31 % of patients did not achieve a complete response and 38 % complete protection. In general, nausea was worse controlled than vomiting. The results also showed the late phase was worse controlled than the acute phase in all variables. Healthcare providers overestimated the effectiveness of antiemetic prophylaxis.

Evaluation of multiparameter flow cytometry for the detection of breast cancer tumor cells in blood samples.

We comparatively evaluated different cytokeratin (CK) reagents analyzed by flow cytometry (FCM) for the identification of the best combination of DNA/CK staining for detecting minimal numbers of breast cancer cells in peripheral blood (PB). In 59 primary breast cancer tumors, we comparatively analyzed the reactivity for up to 6 different anti-CK reagents using multiparameter FCM: anti-CK7, anti-CK20, anti-pan-CK, anti-CK8/CK18, anti-CK8, and anti-CK18. Afterward, dilutional experiments of Michigan Cancer Foundation (MCF)7 breast cancer cells in PB were performed, and the sensitivity of a DNA/CK18 staining was evaluated. Our results showed that anti-CK18 reagents were those providing the brightest and more sensitive staining for primary breast cancer tumor cells by FCM. Dilutional experiments of MCF cells in PB showed that the DNA/anti-CK18 double staining was highly specific for the identification of epithelial cells; its sensitivity ranged between 10(-6) and 10(-7) (detection of 1 tumor cell among 10(6) to 10(7) nucleated blood cells). Combined assessment of DNA cell contents and reactivity for CK18 by FCM is a sensitive method for the specific identification of breast cancer cells in PB.