Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting Incidence and Prevalence

Author(s):  
Steven M. Grunberg

Overview: Although chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is recognized as having been an important problem during the initial introduction of chemotherapy into the antineoplastic armamentarium, the assumption that this problem has already been solved can restrict optimal management and further advances. Underestimation of nausea and vomiting may have many causes. If these toxicities are assumed to be necessary properties of chemotherapy, then their incidence may be taken for granted. If nausea and vomiting appear after discharge from the clinic several days after chemotherapy, these toxicities may not be reported because of poor recall or because of efforts by patients to avoid unnecessary complaints. Physician education may be compromised if physicians see nausea and vomiting as population problems but not problems for their own patients. Failure to recognize nausea and vomiting as two distinct entities that may appear independently of each other can also limit understanding of the prevalence of these problems and efforts at effective management. Continued attention to the impact of nausea and vomiting on the patient experience will be necessary to insure optimal maintenance of quality of life.

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522199844
Author(s):  
Abdullah M Alhammad ◽  
Nora Alkhudair ◽  
Rawan Alzaidi ◽  
Latifa S Almosabhi ◽  
Mohammad H Aljawadi

Introduction Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is a serious complication of cancer treatment that compromises patients’ quality of life and treatment adherence, which necessitates regular assessment. Therefore, there is a need to assess patient-reported nausea and vomiting using a validated scale among Arabic speaking cancer patient population. The objective of this study was to translate and validate the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) instrument in Arabic, a patient-reported outcome measure designed to assess the influence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on patients’ quality of life. Methods Linguistic validation of an Arabic-language version was performed. The instrument was administered to cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in a tertiary hospital's cancer center in Saudi Arabia. Results One-hundred cancer patients who received chemotherapy were enrolled. The participants’ mean age was 53.3 ± 14.9 years, and 50% were female. Half of the participants had a history of nausea and vomiting with previous chemotherapy. The Cronbach coefficient alpha for the FLIE was 0.9606 and 0.9736 for nausea and vomiting domains, respectively, which indicated an excellent reliability for the Arabic FLIE. The mean FLIE score was 110.9 ± 23.5, indicating no or minimal impact on daily life (NIDL). Conclusions The Arabic FLIE is a valid and reliable tool among the Arabic-speaking cancer population. Thus, the Arabic version of the FLIE will be a useful tool to assess the quality of life among Arabic speaking patients receiving chemotherapy. Additionally, the translated instrument will be a useful tool for future research studies to explore new antiemetic treatments among cancer patients.


1998 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. J. Rusthoven ◽  
David Osoba ◽  
Charles A. Butts ◽  
Louise Yelle ◽  
Helen Findlay ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 40-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Ludlow ◽  
John Green

Radiotherapy used to treat cancers in the pelvic region can have lasting side effects, and the persistence of these symptoms for 3 months or more is described as pelvic radiation disease (PRD). The growing number of pelvic cancer patients being diagnosed and successfully treated is increasing the incidence of PRD. This review examines the literature on the gastrointestinal symptoms of PRD. This includes how PRD is defined, how it is identified and how it relates specifically to the three pelvic cancers in which it most commonly manifests (prostate, gynaecological and colorectal). It pays particular attention to the impact of PRD on patient experience and quality of life. This review is the first part in a series on the GI symptoms of PRD.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Bich-Thuy Truong ◽  
Elin Ngo ◽  
Hilde Ariansen ◽  
Ross T. Tsuyuki ◽  
Hedvig Nordeng

Abstract Background Maternal wellbeing and quality of life (QOL) are increasingly being recognized as important for healthy pregnancies. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a pharmacist consultation on pregnant women’s QOL focusing on nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP), and patient satisfaction. Methods For this intervention study in 14 community pharmacies, women in early pregnancy were recruited and assigned to a pharmacist consultation (intervention) or standard care (control). The consultation aimed to address each woman’s concerns regarding medications and pregnancy-related ailments. Data were collected through online questionnaires at baseline (Q1) and during the second trimester (Q2). The intervention group completed an additional satisfaction questionnaire after the consultation was completed. The primary outcome was the impact of the intervention on the Quality of Life Scale (QOLS) scores between the first and second trimesters. The impact of the intervention was assessed by linear regression, and secondary analyses were performed to assess effect modification by NVP. Results Of the 340 women enrolled in the study, we analyzed data for 245. Half (170/340) of the original participants were allocated to the intervention group, of whom 131 received the pharmacist consultation. Most women (75%, 78/96) reported that the consultation was useful to a large/very large extent. The consultation had no overall impact on QOLS scores between the first and the second trimesters compared with standard care (adjusted β: 0.7, 95% CI: -2.1, 3.4). The impact of the intervention on QOLS was greater amongst women with moderate/severe NVP (adjusted β: 3.6, 95% CI: -0.6, 7.7) compared to those with no/mild NVP (adjusted β: -1.4, 95% CI: -5.1, 2.2) (interaction term study group*NVP severity, p = 0.048). Conclusions The pregnant women highly appreciated the pharmacist consultation, but the intervention did not affect their QOL scores compared with standard care. Future studies should further explore the effect of a pharmacist consultation specifically for NVP and on other outcomes such as use of health care services and medication use in pregnancy. Trial registration Retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT04182750, registration date: December 2, 2019).


2013 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. S1-S10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Clark ◽  
Barbara Hughes ◽  
Susan Schwartz McDonald

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS777-TPS777
Author(s):  
Stephanie Lelond ◽  
Harvey Chochinov ◽  
Paul Joseph Daeninck ◽  
Benjamin Adam Goldenberg ◽  
Lisa Lix ◽  
...  

TPS777 Background: Pancreatic cancer is lethal. Chemotherapy can improve survival by months; however, many patients experience an overwhelming burden of cancer-associated symptoms and poor quality of life (QOL). Early palliative care (EPC) alongside standard oncologic care results in improved QOL and survival in patients with lung cancer. Although international guidelines recommend EPC for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PANC), the benefit is not known. Objectives: The primary objective is to test for change in QOL between baseline (BL) and 16 weeks (wk). Secondary objectives are to test for change between BL and 16 wk in (a) symptom control; and (b) depression and anxiety. Methods: This prospective case-crossover study of patients with PANC provides EPC plus standard oncologic care. Primary oncology clinics refer patients to an EPC team led by a palliative care physician and a clinical nurse specialist. BL questionnaires are completed prior to initial EPC assessment, then every 4 wk until wk 16. EPC visits are every 2 wk for the first month, every 4 wk until wk 16, and then as needed. QOL, symptom control, anxiety and depression are measured using the FACT-Hep tool, ESAS-r, HADS and PHQ-9, respectively. A generalized linear model will test for statistically significant change in scores between BL and 16 wk; chemotherapy (yes/no) is included as a confounding covariate; model fit will be assessed. A sample size of 20 patients provides 80% power after controlling for covariate effects. 40 patients will be enrolled to account for missing data. To date, 28 patients have enrolled and 17 have completed the intervention. Significance: The benefit of EPC for patients with PANC is not known, however, EPC is increasingly recognized internationally by patients and stakeholders as a critical intervention which may improve both QOL and satisfaction with care. The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer’s report on the patient experience states “the best possible patient experience means all people with cancer have equitable access to high-quality person-centered palliative care”. This study offers access to EPC and provides an environment in which the benefit of an integrated approach is evaluated.


2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dyah Aryani Perwitasari ◽  
Jarir Atthobari ◽  
Mustofa Mustofa ◽  
Iwan Dwiprahasto ◽  
Mohammad Hakimi ◽  
...  

BackgroundQuality of life (QoL) has become a major outcome in the treatment of patients with cancer. This study is aimed at examining the impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting on QoL of patients with gynecologic cancer in Indonesia.MethodsChemotherapy-naive patients with gynecologic cancer, who were treated with cisplatin at a dosage 50 mg/m2or higher as monotherapy or as part of combination chemotherapy regimens, were recruited in the Oncology Department, Dr. Sardjito Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Quality of life was assessed by using the Indonesian version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer of Quality of Life Questionnaire and Short Form-36, administered immediately before and on day 5 after chemotherapy administration. Patients used a daily diary to record nausea and vomiting during 5 days after chemotherapy.ResultsMost (74.9%) of the 179 patients experienced delayed emesis during the 5 days after chemotherapy despite prophylactic use of antiemetics. The delayed nausea and emesis caused significant negative impact on patients’ QoL. Nausea in the delayed phase caused negative effects on patients’ QoL.ConclusionsPatients reported a negative impact on the QoL of delayed emesis after chemotherapy. Poor prophylaxis of patients’ nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy interferes with patients’ QoL. Medical and behavioral interventions may help to alleviate the negative consequences of chemotherapeutic treatment in patients with gynecologic cancers treated with suboptimal antiemetics.


Author(s):  
Meghana Dutta ◽  
Rooha K

Cancer is a public health concern amongst millions of humans and claims hundreds of lives every year. The maximum worry-inducing side effect of cancer treatment is nausea and vomiting. Therefore, stopping and managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting is an important part of a cancer patient’s treatment plan. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and quality of life provided by two commonly used antiemetic regimens in the management and prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cancer patients. We assessed patient-reported nausea, vomiting, use of rescue medication, and Functional Living IndexEmesis (FLIE) questionnaire results, and used them as parameters to make comparisons. We also examined the percentage of patients showing complete response (CR; no emesis and non-use of rescue antiemetics), and the impact of CINV on patient’s daily life during the acute and delayed phases. The results show that the complete response is achieved by 26 patients in group-B and 18 patients in group-A, from the total 60 patients, while the FLIE scores indicated better quality of life is maintained in group-B (76.6%). In the study, the predominance of Netupitant and Palonosetron regimen to Ondansetron was demonstrated.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (27) ◽  
pp. 4472-4478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brigitte Bloechl-Daum ◽  
Robert R. Deuson ◽  
Panagiotis Mavros ◽  
Mogens Hansen ◽  
Jørn Herrstedt

PurposeChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are major adverse effects of cancer chemotherapy. We compared the impact of acute (during the first 24 hours postchemotherapy) and delayed (days 2 through 5 postchemotherapy) CINV on patients' quality of life (QoL) after highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC, respectively).Patients and MethodsThis prospective, multicenter, multinational study was conducted in 14 medical practices on cancer patients undergoing either HEC or MEC treatment. Patients recorded episodes of nausea and vomiting in a diary. Patients completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire at baseline and on day 6.ResultsA total of 298 patients were assessable (67 HEC patients, 231 MEC patients). Emesis was reported by 36.4% of patients (13.2% acute, 32.5% delayed) and nausea by 59.7% (36.2% acute, 54.3% delayed). HEC patients reported significantly lower mean FLIE total score than MEC patients (95.5 v 107.8 respectively; P = .0049). Among all patients, the nausea score was significantly lower than the vomiting score (50.0 and 55.3, respectively; P = .0097). Of the 173 patients who experienced neither vomiting nor nausea during the first 24 hours postchemotherapy, 22.9% reported an impact of CINV on daily life caused by delayed CINV.ConclusionCINV continues to adversely affect patients' QoL despite antiemetic therapy even after treatment with only moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, and even in the subgroup of patients who do not experience nausea and vomiting during the first 24 hours. On the basis of the FLIE results in this study, nausea had a stronger negative impact on patients' daily lives than vomiting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document