Untitled

Ballatori, Enzo; Roila, Fausto

doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-46

Cited by 107 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The total score, calculated by summing the responses to the 18 items, ranges from 18 to 126, with higher scores representing better health outcomes (i.e., less impact of CINV on daily life) [18]. Following Bloechl-Daum et al, an individual item score of six or more, and a total FLIE score of 108 or more were considered evidence of no or minimal impact of CINV on daily life [5].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in daily clinical practice: a community hospital-based study

Hilarius

Kloeg

Wall

et al. 2011

Support Care Cancer

163

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are major adverse effects of cancer chemotherapy. This study investigated: (1) the impact of CINV on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) in daily clinical practice; (2) the association between patient characteristics and type of antiemetics and CINV; and (3) the role of CINV in physicians' decisions to modify antiemetic treatment.Patients and methodsThis prospective, multicenter study was conducted in nine general hospitals in the Netherlands. During three consecutive chemotherapy cycles, patients used a diary to record episodes of nausea, vomiting and antiemetic use. For each cycle, these ratings were made 1 day prior to and 7 days after having received chemotherapy. The influence of CINV on patients' HRQL was evaluated with the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire at day 6 of each treatment cycle. (Changes in) antiemetic use were recorded by the treating nurse. Patient inclusion took place between May 2005 and May 2007.ResultsTwo hundred seventy-seven patients were enrolled in the study. Acute and delayed nausea during the first treatment cycle was reported by 39% and 68% of the patients, respectively. The comparable figures for acute and delayed vomiting were 12% and 23%. During the first and subsequent treatment cycle, approximately one-third of the patients indicated that CINV had a substantial impact on their daily lives. Female patients and younger patients reported significantly more CINV than male and older patients. At all treatment cycles, patients receiving treatment with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, containing anthracycline, reported more acute nausea than patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Acute vomiting was associated significantly with change in (i.e., additional) antiemetic treatment. Delayed CINV did not influence antiemetic treatment.ConclusionCINV continues to be a problem that adversely affects the daily lives of patients. CINV is worse in women and in younger patients. In daily clinical practice, acute CINV, but not delayed CINV, results in changes in antiemetic treatment. In view of the effects of not only acute, but also delayed CINV on daily life, more attention should be paid to adjustment of antiemetic treatment to cover CINV complaints, later during the chemotherapy cycle.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in daily clinical practice: a community hospital-based study

Hilarius

Kloeg

Wall

et al. 2011

Support Care Cancer

163

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The survey, which took 10–15 minutes to complete, included the Modified Functional Living Index–emesis (M-FLIE),30,31 Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-fatigue (FACIT-F),32 and Martin et al’s NV-5 instruments 33. The M-FLIE measures functional impact of nausea (nine items) and vomiting (nine items) on daily life; total scores range from 18 to 126, and higher scores indicate better QoL 30,31,34. The 13-item FACIT-F assesses the impact of fatigue on QoL; total scores range from 0 to 52, higher values indicate better QoL, and a ±3-point change in score from baseline is considered clinically meaningful 32.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Phase II single-arm trial of palonosetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in malignant glioma patients receiving multidose irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab

Affronti

Woodring

Peters

et al. 2016

TCRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeGiven that the prognosis of recurrent malignant glioma (MG) remains poor, improving quality of life (QoL) through symptom management is important. Meta-analyses establishing antiemetic guidelines have demonstrated the superiority of palonosetron (PAL) over older 5-hydroxytryptamine 3-receptor antagonists in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prevention, but excluded patients with gliomas. Irinotecan plus bevacizumab is a treatment frequently used in MG, but is associated with low (55%) CINV complete response (CR; no emesis or use of rescue antiemetic) with commonly prescribed ondansetron. A single-arm Phase II trial was conducted in MG patients to determine the efficacy of intravenous PAL (0.25 mg) and dexamethasone (DEX; 10 mg) received in conjunction with biweekly irinotecan–bevacizumab treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects achieving acute CINV CR (no emesis or antiemetic ≤24 hours postchemotherapy). Secondary end points included delayed CINV CR (days 2–5), overall CINV CR (days 1–5), and QoL, fatigue, and toxicity.Materials and methodsA two-stage design of 160 patients was planned to differentiate between CINV CR of 55% and 65% after each dose of PAL–DEX. Validated surveys assessed fatigue and QoL.ResultsA total of 63 patients were enrolled, after which enrollment was terminated due to slow accrual; 52 patients were evaluable for the primary outcome of acute CINV CR. Following PAL–DEX dose administrations 1–3, acute CINV CR rates were 62%, 68%, and 70%; delayed CINV CR rates were 62%, 66%, and 70%, and overall CINV CR rates were 47%, 57%, and 62%, respectively. Compared to baseline, there was a clinically meaningful increase in fatigue during acute and overall phases, but not in the delayed phase. There were no grade ≥3 PAL–DEX treatment-related toxicities.ConclusionData suggest that PAL–DEX is effective in preventing CINV in MG patients, which ultimately maintains the QoL of patients with glioma.

show abstract

“…Uncontrolled CINV can result in malnutrition, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalance [8] and has been associated with the development of anticipatory nausea and vomiting with the potential to compromise adherence to treatment [8, 9]. Fortunately, substantial progress in our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying CINV has led to the development of highly effective therapeutic approaches [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Validation of the FLIE instrument is a sensitive and reliable measure of the impact of CINV on QoL [16, 17]. Furthermore, use of the FLIE has demonstrated that beyond a reduction in the physical symptoms of nausea and vomiting, effective antiemetic prophylaxis reduces the negative impact of CINV on patients’ daily lives [8, 18]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rolapitant improves quality of life of patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

Chasen

Urbán²,

Schnadig

et al. 2016

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAddition of rolapitant to standard antiemetic therapy improved protection against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in phase 3 trials of patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Here, we assessed the impact of CINV on the daily lives of patients receiving HEC or MEC using the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE).MethodsIn three double-blind phase 3 studies, patients receiving HEC or MEC were randomized 1:1 to receive oral rolapitant 180 mg or placebo prior to chemotherapy plus 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone therapy. Patients completed the FLIE questionnaire on day 6 of cycle 1. Endpoints included FLIE total score, nausea and vomiting domain scores, and the proportion of patients with no impact on daily life (total score >108 [range 18–126]). We performed a prespecified analysis of the MEC/anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC) study and a post hoc analysis of two pooled cisplatin-based HEC studies.ResultsIn the pooled HEC studies, rolapitant significantly improved the FLIE total score (114.5 vs 109.3, p < 0.001), nausea score (55.3 vs 53.5, p < 0.05), and vomiting score (59.2 vs 55.8, p < 0.001) versus control; similar results were observed in the MEC/AC study for FLIE total score (112.7 vs 108.6, p < 0.001), nausea score (54.1 vs 52.3, p < 0.05), and vomiting score (58.6 vs 56.3, p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients reported no impact on daily life with rolapitant than with control in the MEC/AC study (73.2 vs 67.4, p = 0.027).ConclusionsCompared with control, rolapitant improved quality of life in patients receiving HEC or MEC.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 107 publications

References 25 publications

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in daily clinical practice: a community hospital-based study

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in daily clinical practice: a community hospital-based study

A Phase II single-arm trial of palonosetron for the prevention of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in malignant glioma patients receiving multidose irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab

Rolapitant improves quality of life of patients receiving highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About