Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Taiwan: physicians’ and nurses’ estimation vs. patients’ reported outcomes

  • Supportive Care International
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The major objective of the study was to determine the incidence and prevalence of acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving chemotherapy and assess the accuracy with which medical providers perceive the incidence of CINV in their practice.

Methods

Specialists, residents and nurses (medical providers) from two cancer centers in Taiwan estimated the incidence of acute and delayed CINV. Chemotherapy-naïve patients from the same centers then completed a 5-day nausea and vomiting diary following highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC and MEC) to determine the actual incidence of acute and delayed CINV. Daily nausea ratings were recorded on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). No nausea was defined as a nausea VAS score <5 mm. Vomiting episodes were also recorded. Nausea and vomiting were defined as acute and delayed based on whether they occurred during the first 24 h after chemotherapy, or during days 2–5 after chemotherapy, respectively.

Results

In the two oncology centers, 37 medical providers (13 specialists, 4 residents, 20 nurses) and 107 patients were enrolled. The mean patient age was 49.2 years with 76% female and 74% having breast cancer. Of the 107 patients, 39% received HEC and 61% received MEC, and 77% received a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and 94% received dexamethasone. There were no significant differences between patients with acute CINV and delayed CINV in terms of demographics, chemotherapy treatment or antiemetic treatment. The proportion of patients without alcohol use was significantly higher among patients with delayed CINV than among those with non-delayed CINV. Good control of CINV during the acute period correlated with the control of delayed emesis. There were no significant differences between specialists’, residents’, and nurses’ estimations of the incidence rates of CINV. For HEC given to chemotherapy-naïve patients, the medical providers estimated acute CINV to be 44/41% and delayed CINV to be 61/53%, respectively. However, patient diaries revealed acute CINV to be 43/21% and delayed CINV to be 64/60%, respectively. For MEC given to chemotherapy-naïve patients, medical providers estimated acute CINV to be 39/36% and delayed CINV to be 44/39%, respectively. However, patient diaries revealed acute CINV to be 55/18% and delayed CINV to be 74/55%, respectively.

Conclusions

Medical providers significantly overestimated the incidence of acute vomiting by 20% and 18% in HEC and MEC patients, respectively. While they correctly estimated the rate of delayed vomiting in HEC patients, they underestimated it by 16% in MEC patients. With respect to nausea, medical providers correctly estimated rates of both acute and delayed nausea in HEC patients, but significantly underestimated rates of acute and delayed nausea by 16% and 30%, respectively, in MEC patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berger AM, Clark-Snow RA (1997) Adverse effects of treatment, nausea and vomiting. In: DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles and practice of oncology. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 2705–2714

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hesketh PJ (2000) Comparative review of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in the treatment of acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Cancer Invest 18:163–173

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rhodes VA, Watson PM, Johnson MH, Madsen RW, Beck NC (1987) Patterns of nausea, vomiting, and distress in patients receiving antineoplastic drug protocols. Oncol Nurs Forum 14:35–44

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rhodes VA, McDaniel RW (2001) Nausea, vomiting, and retching: complex problems in palliative care. CA Cancer J Clin 51:232–248; quiz 249–252

    Google Scholar 

  5. Morrow GR (1989) Chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting: etiology and management. CA Cancer J Clin 39:89–104

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tonato M, Roila F, Del Favero A (1991) Methodology of antiemetic trials: a review. Ann Oncol 2:107–114

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pollera CF, Giannarelli D (1989) Prognostic factors influencing cisplatin-induced emesis. Cancer 64:1117–1122

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pater J, Slamet L, Zee B, Osoba D, Warr D, Rusthoven J (1994) Inconsistency of prognostic factors for post-chemotherapy nausea and vomiting. Support Care Cancer 2:161–166

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hesketh PJ, Kris MG, Grunberg SM, Beck T, Hainsworth JD, Harker G, et al (1997) Proposal for classifying the acute emetogenicity of cancer chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 15:103–109

    Google Scholar 

  10. Yalcin S, Tekuzman G, Baltali E, Ozisik Y, Barista I (1999) Serotonin receptor antagonists in prophylaxis of acute and delayed emesis induced by moderately emetogenic, single-day chemotherapy: a randomized study. Am J Clin Oncol 22:94–96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Roila F, Boschetti E, Tonato M, Basurto C, Bracarda S, Picciafuoco M, et al (1991) Predictive factors of delayed emesis in cisplatin-treated patients and antiemetic activity and tolerability of metoclopramide or dexamethasone: a randomized single-blind study. Am J Clin Oncol 14:238–242

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Italian Group For Antiemetic Research (1992) Ondansetron+dexamethasone vs metoclopramide+dexamethasone+diphenhydramine in prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis. Lancet 340:96–99

    Google Scholar 

  13. Roila F (1993) Ondansetron plus dexamethasone compared to the ‘standard’ metoclopramide combination. Oncology 50:163–167

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hesketh PJ, Gandara DR (1991) Serotonin antagonists: a new class of antiemetic agents. J Natl Cancer Inst 83:613–620

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kris MG, Gralla RJ, Clark RA, Tyson LB (1989) Phase II trials of the serotonin antagonist GR38032F for the control of vomiting caused by cisplatin. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:42–46

    Google Scholar 

  16. Grunberg SM, Hansen M, Deuson R, Mavros P (2002) Incidence and impact of nausea/vomiting with modern antiemetics: perception vs. reality. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 21:250a

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gralla RJ, Osoba D, Kris MG, et al (1999) Recommendations for guidelines for the use of antiemetics: evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. J Clin Oncol 17:2971–2994

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Borjeson S, Hursti TJ, Peterson C, et al (1997) Similarities and differences in assessing nausea and vomiting on a verbal category scale and a visual analogue scale. Cancer Nurs 20:260–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Martin AR, Cai B, Pearson J, et al (2001) Patient-assessed impact of chemotherapy-induced nausea on daily life: how much is too much? Oncol Nurs Forum 28:338

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fetting JH, Grochow LB, Folstein MF, Ettinger DS, Colvin M (1982) The course of nausea and vomiting after high-dose cyclophosphamide. Cancer Treat Rep 66:1487–1493

    Google Scholar 

  21. Morrow GR (1992) A patient report measure for the quantification of chemotherapy induced nausea and emesis: psychometric properties of the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis (MANE). Br J Cancer [Suppl] 19:S72–S74

    Google Scholar 

  22. Willan A, Warr D, Pater J, et al (1991) Methodological issues and antiemetic studies. In: Osoba D (ed) Effect of cancer on quality of life. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 229–249

    Google Scholar 

  23. Koo WH, Ang PT (1996) Role of maintenance oral dexamethasone in prophylaxis of delayed emesis caused by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 7:71–74

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ossi M, Anderson E, Freeman A (1996) 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis. Oncology 53 [Suppl 1]:78–85

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gralla RJ, Osoba D, Kris MG, Kirkbride P, Hesketh PJ, Chinnery LW, et al (1999) Recommendations for the use of antiemetics: evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines. American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 17:2971–2994

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gralla RJ (1994) Antiemetic treatment for cancer chemotherapy: problems and progress. Support Care Cancer 2:275–276

    Google Scholar 

  27. Heron JF (1995) Single-agent oral granisetron for the prevention of acute cisplatin-induced emesis: a double-blind, randomized comparison with granisetron plus dexamethasone and high-dose metoclopramide plus dexamethasone. Semin Oncol 22 [4 Suppl 10]:24–30

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Poli-Bigelli S, Rodrigues-Pereira J, Carides AD, Julie MG, Eldridge K, Hipple A, et al (2003) Addition of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist aprepitant to standard antiemetic therapy improves control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Latin America. Cancer 97:3090–3098

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goedhals L, Heron JF, Kleisbauer JP, Pagani O, Sessa C (1998) Control of delayed nausea and vomiting with granisetron plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, comparative study. Ann Oncol 9:661–666

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schnell FM (2003) Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: the importance of acute antiemetic control. Oncologist 8:187–198

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We thank Dr. Steven Grunberg, Fletcher Allen Health Care, University of Vermont, USA, for his critical review of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology–Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, 199, Duenhua North Road, Sungshan Chiu, Taipei, Taiwan, 105, Republic of China

    Chi-Ting Liau & Jen-Shi Chen

  2. Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Koo Foundation Sun Yat-Sen Cancer Center, Taipei, Taiwan

    Nei-Min Chu

  3. School of Nursing, Chang Gung University, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan

    Hsueh-Erh Liu

  4. Outcomes Research, Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA

    Robert Deuson

  5. Medical Department, Merck, Sharp & Dohme (I.A.) Corp., Taipei, Taiwan

    Jade Lien

Authors
  1. Chi-Ting Liau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nei-Min Chu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hsueh-Erh Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert Deuson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jade Lien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jen-Shi Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jen-Shi Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liau, CT., Chu, NM., Liu, HE. et al. Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in Taiwan: physicians’ and nurses’ estimation vs. patients’ reported outcomes. Support Care Cancer 13, 277–286 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-005-0788-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-005-0788-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation