Cardiotoxicity in Chinese cancer patients treated with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine: A multicenter prospective observational study.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 553-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gong Chen ◽  
Jianjun Peng ◽  
Chao Dong ◽  
Meng Qiu ◽  
Chang Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Cardiac Disease ◽  
Chinese Population ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Chinese Cancer Patients

553 Background: Although the cardiotoxicity associated with 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine administration has been well addressed in literature, there is still a lack of data from prospective clinical trials in Chinese population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, manifestations and predisposing factors for the cardiotoxicity in Chinese cancer patients treated 5-FU or capecitabine. Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was performed in 527 patients with various solid tumors from 12 cancer centers in china . Of these patients, 196 received 5-FU-based and 331 received oral capecitabine-based chemotherapy as either first-line or adjuvant therapy. Outcome measures including electrocardiogram(ECG), myocardial enzymes, cardiac troponin(cTn), BNP and echocardio- graphy(UCG) etc. Univariate analysis and the logistic regression were performed for subgroup analysis and identification of the significant independent variables that are associated with cardiotoxicity of both agents. Results: In total, 161 of 527 patients (30.55%) experienced cardiotoxicity. The incidence of cardiotoxicity was 33.84% (112 out of 331) in the capecitabine-treated population, significantly higher than 25 %( 49 out of 196) in the 5-FU treated population (P = 0.0042). 110 out of 527 patients (20.87%) suffered arrhythmia, 105/527 (19.92%) developed ischemic changes, while 20/527(3.80%) heart failure and 6/527 (1.14%) myocardial infarction only. Among the factors evaluated with univariate analysis and the logistic regression, a history of cardiac disease, chemotherapy agent, duration of treatment and hypertension were significant with cardiotoxicity occurrence. The odds ratio were 15.447(with a history of cardiac history vs without), 2.118 (Capecitabine group vs 5-FU group), 1.079(5-8 vs 1-4 cycles) and 1.698 (with hypertension vs without) respectively. Conclusions: Cardiotoxicity induced by fluoropyrimidines in Chinese population may be underestimated in clinical practice.Possible risk factors are duration of treatment, chemotherapy agents, preexisting cardiac disease and hypertension.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist and Dexamethasone as Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting During Moderately Emetic Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30%–90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Results: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26–84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51% and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC. Conclusion: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5)+ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during moderately emetic chemotherapy for solid tumors: a multicenter, prospective, observational study

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30–90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. Methods In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Results Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26–84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51 and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC. Conclusions Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5) + ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

scholarly journals Determinants of complex regional pain syndrome type I in patients with scaphoid waist fracture- a multicenter prospective observational study

2022 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Gong ◽  
Gang Zhao ◽  
Yuzhou Liu ◽  
Zhengfeng Lu
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Conservative Treatment ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Type I ◽  
Syndrome Type ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background The aim of this prospective study was to assess the incidence of complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS I) in patients with scaphoid waist fracture and to explore associated factors. Methods This was a multicenter, prospective observational study. Demographic, imaging indicators and clinical data were collected before the conservative treatment of scaphoid waist fracture patients. The occurrence of CRPS I and pain condition were the main outcomes. To explore the factors associated with CRPS I, multivariate logistic regression model was used. Results A total of 493 scaphoid waist fracture participants undergoing conservative treatment were recruited for this study. The incidence of CRPS I was 20% (n = 87). The average time between injury and the onset of CRPS I was 6.7 ± 2.1 weeks. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that female sex (odds ratio (OR): 1.669; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.189–2.338), diabetes mellitus (OR: 3.206; 95% CI: 2.284–4.492), and severe pain condition before treatment (visual analog scale (VAS) score more than 4 cm) (OR: 27.966; 95% CI: 19.924–39.187) were independently associated with CRPS I. Conclusions Patients suffering from scaphoid waist fracture may be at a higher risk of CRPS I, especially in women with diabetes mellitus who report severe pain before treatment. Early screening and regular follow up evaluation are recommended in these patients.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist and Dexamethasone as Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting during Moderately Emetic Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30%–90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial.Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone.Results: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26–84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51% and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC.Conclusion: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5)+ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist and Dexamethasone as Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting during Moderately Emetic Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background Patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC) occurs chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in 30–90%, however the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. Methods In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC for various cancer types in Japan, We enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist(5HT3RAs) and dexamethasone. We assessed various possible risk factors for complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures), total control (TC; no emetic events , no antiemetic measures and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures and less than mild nausea) by univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The overall CR rate was 64%, CBDCA-based chemotherapy and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were particularly low. However, we showed that the CR rates in men were high in CBDCA(AUC5)＋ETP (80%), CapeOX (78%) and CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer(73% ). Emesis occurred significantly more women (30%) than men (16%) of patients overall. TC and CC were achieved by 51% and 61% of patients. Logistic regression analysis revealed that age <65 years and history of motion sickness or pregnancy-associated vomiting were risk factors for nausea and being women for vomiting. Conclusions Our data support triplet regimen including NK1 receptor antagonist with woman receiving CBDCA-based chemotherapy or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, it became clear that two antiemetics for men received CBDCA(AUC5)＋ETP, CBDCA＋PTX for lung cancer and CAPOX may be sufficiently effective. Further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC on the basis of both type of chemotherapy regimen and sex is needed.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist and Dexamethasone as Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting during Moderately Emetic Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
History Of ◽  
Independent Risk Factors ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30%–90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Results: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26–84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51% and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that no history of motion sickness, no history of pregnancy-associated vomiting, and non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy are independent risk factors for CR, whereas no history of motion sickness and no history of pregnancy-associated vomiting are independent risk factors for TC. Conclusion: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5)+ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

scholarly journals 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist and Dexamethasone as Prophylaxis for Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting during Moderately Emetic Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiko Matsui ◽  
Kenichi Suzuki ◽  
Tomomi Takiguchi ◽  
Makoto Nishio ◽  
Takeshi Koike ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Motion Sickness ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

Abstract Background: Of patients receiving moderate emetic risk chemotherapy (MEC), 30%–90% experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV); however, the optimal antiemetic treatment remains controversial. Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, observational study of adults treated with MEC while receiving chemotherapy for various cancer types in Japan, the enrolled patients kept diaries documenting CINV. All participants received a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Results: Of the 400 patients enrolled from May 2013 to January 2015, 386 were eligible for evaluation. The median age was 64 (range, 26–84). The overall complete response (CR; no emetic events and no antiemetic measures) rate was 64%. The proportion of patients showing CR was low in the carboplatin (CBDCA)- and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy groups, especially among women. We showed that the CR rates in men were high in the CBDCA (AUC5) + etoposide (ETP) (80%), capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) (78%), and CBDCA+ paclitaxel (PTX) groups for lung cancer (73%). Total control (TC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and no nausea) and complete control (CC; no emetic events, no antiemetic measures, and less than mild nausea) were achieved in 51% and 61% of patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed history of motion sickness, history of pregnancy-associated vomiting and CBDCA-based chemotherapy as risk factors for CR and history of motion sickness and history of pregnancy-associated vomiting as risk factors for TC. Additional, Ages ≥65 years is an independent predictive factor for achieving TC. Conclusion: Our data showed that two antiemetics were insufficient to control CINV in patients receiving CBDCA- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. However, two antiemetics may be sufficiently effective for elderly male patients receiving CBDCA (AUC5)+ETP, CBDCA+PTX for lung cancer, or CAPOX. Additionally, we consider that three antiemetics are necessary for women with colorectal cancer receiving CAPOX. Risk factor analysis related to CR showed that CINV prophylaxis in patients treated with CBDCA-based chemotherapy was generally supportive of the guideline-recommended three antiemetics. However, the control of nausea in patients receiving non-CBDCA-based chemotherapy is a key point to note. The further individualization of antiemetic regimens for patients receiving MEC based on both types of chemotherapy regimens and sex is needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document