Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 97 items for :

  • "nausea and vomiting" x
Clear All
Full access

John M. Salsman, Steven M. Grunberg, Jennifer L. Beaumont, Miriam Rogers, Diane Paul, Marla L. Clayman and David Cella

Nausea and vomiting are two of the most common and debilitating side-effects of chemotherapy and can result in significant morbidity and adversely impact patient quality of life. 1 – 4 Nausea and vomiting secondary to chemotherapy may lead to

Full access

Susan Urba

Radiat Oncol Bio Phys 1999 ; 44 : 619 – 625 . 3. Horiot JC . Prophylaxis versus treatment: is there a better way to manage radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004 ; 15 : 1018 – 1025 . 4

Full access

Colmar Figueroa-Moseley, Pascal Jean-Pierre, Joseph A. Roscoe, Julie L. Ryan, Sadhna Kohli, Oxana G. Palesh, Elizabeth P. Ryan, Jennifer Carroll and Gary R. Morrow

The authors have been supported by Grant U10CA 37420 from the National Cancer Institute. References 1. Osoba D Zee B Warr D . Effect of postchemotherapy nausea and vomiting on health-related quality of life . The Quality of

Full access

Barbara Todaro

The management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) has improved over the past 20 years. Before the introduction of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, treatment options were limited to less-effective and more

Full access

Sally Yowell Barbour

agents associated with high rates of CINV Analyze the use of corticosteroids in the treatment of acute CINV Analyze the use of corticosteroids in the treatment of delayed CINV Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most

Full access

Ting Bao

cancer nausea and vomiting . J Clin Oncol 2008 ; 26 : 3903 – 3910 . 2 Hickok JT Roscoe JA Morrow GR . Nausea and emesis remain significant problems of chemotherapy despite prophylaxis with 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 antiemetics: a University of

Full access

Joseph A. Roscoe, Gary R. Morrow, Jane T. Hickok, Karen M. Mustian and Abhay R. Shelke

and Prochlorperazine in patients with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting . N Engl J Med 1981 ; 305 : 905 – 909 . 3 Morrow GR Roscoe JA Hickok JT . Nausea and Vomiting . In: Holland JC. , ed. Psycho-oncology. New York : Oxford

Full access

David S. Ettinger, Debra K. Armstrong, Sally Barbour, Michael J. Berger, Philip J. Bierman, Bob Bradbury, Georgianna Ellis, Steve Kirkegaard, Dwight D. Kloth, Mark G. Kris, Dean Lim, Michael Anne Markiewicz, Lida Nabati, Carli Nesheiwat, Hope S. Rugo, Steven M. Sorscher, Lisa Stucky-Marshal, Barbara Todaro and Susan Urba

– 1752 . 5 Morran C Smith DC Anderson DA . Incidence of nausea and vomiting with cytotoxic chemotherapy: a prospective randomized trial of antiemetics . Br Med J 1979 ; 1 : 1323 – 1324 . 6 Jenns K . Importance of nausea

Full access

Eric J Roeland, Thomas W. LeBlanc, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Ryan Nipp, Rebecca Clark-Snow, Rita Wickham, Gary Binder, William L. Bailey, Ravi Potluri, Luke M. Schmerold, Eros Papademetriou and Rudolph M. Navari

Background: Avoiding acute care services can improve cancer care and reduce cost. The US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) new oncology outcome measure (OP-35) defines 30-day post-chemotherapy inpatient (IP) and/or emergency department (ED) events (IP/ED) as “potentially avoidable” if involving any of 10 toxicities, including nausea or vomiting (NV). Evidence demonstrates meaningful gaps in oncologists’ adherence to antiemetic prophylaxis guidelines for highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), and that NV-related IP use costs >$10,000; yet the incidence of avoidable acute care events involving NV is not well studied. Methods: We assessed chemotherapy courses using IBM Explorys electronic health records (4Q 2012–1Q 2018). We identified rates of IP/ED ≤30 days post-chemotherapy, and OP-35 toxicities (NV, anemia, dehydration, diarrhea, fever, neutropenia, pain, pneumonia, or sepsis) by ICD-9, ICD-10, procedure codes, and CMS criteria. We evaluated cisplatin, anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC), carboplatin (>14 days apart, as a proxy for AUC ≥4), oxaliplatin (OX), and other non-HEC chemotherapy. We assessed guideline adherence, defined as triple prophylaxis (NK1 RA + 5HT3 RA +dexamethasone) rates at HEC initiation. Results: In 17,609 HEC and 56,624 non-HEC courses, we observed 30-day IP/ED utilization in 29% and 19% of courses, respectively (Table 1). For HEC, 76% of IP/ED use involved ≥1 of the 10 CMS toxicities, most often anemia (42%), pain (41%), dehydration (24%), and NV (24%). Rates of all-cause IP/ED, IP/ED with OP-35 toxicity, and NV-related IP/ED were consistent for HEC and OX. Gaps in triple prophylaxis were common in HEC. Conclusion: Roughly one-third of patients receiving HEC or OX experienced IP/ED events ≤30 days after chemotherapy. Three-quarters of IP/ED events involved ≥1 of 10 OP-35 toxicities linked by CMS to potentially avoidable acute care; of these, one-third involved NV. NV-associated acute care use is considerable, costly, and potentially avoidable with better adherence to antiemesis guidelines.

Full access

Robert McNulty

1998 ; 4 : 52 – 58 . 9. Perez EA Hesketh P Sandbach J . Comparison of single-dose oral granisetron versus intravenous ondansetron in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: a multicenter, double