4.6 Article

The nature of nausea: prevalence, etiology, and treatment in patients with advanced cancer not receiving antineoplastic treatment

期刊

SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
卷 27, 期 8, 页码 3071-3080

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4623-1

关键词

Nausea; Advanced cancer; N; V; Etiology; Treatment

资金

  1. Danish Cancer Society
  2. IMK foundation
  3. Region of Southern Denmark

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundThe prevalence of nausea/vomiting in patients with advanced cancer has a wide range. Due to a very low level of evidence regarding antiemetic treatment, current guidelines recommend an etiology-based approach. The evidence for this approach is also slim and research is urgently needed.Objectives(Part One) to elucidate the prevalence of nausea and the possible associations with sociodemographic and clinical variables and (Part Two) to investigate possible etiologies of nausea and antiemetic treatments initiated in patients with nausea.MethodsPatients with advanced cancer and no recent antineoplastic treatment were included in a prospective two-part study. In Part One, patients completed an extended version of the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL. Nauseated patients could then be included in Part Two in which possible etiologies and antiemetic treatment were recorded and a follow-up questionnaire was completed.ResultsEight hundred twenty-one patients were included and 46% reported any degree of nausea. Younger age and female sex were associated with a higher degree of nausea. Common etiologies included constipation, opioid use, and other, and treatments associated with a statistically significant decrease in nausea/vomiting were olanzapine, laxatives, corticosteroids, domperidone, and metoclopramide.ConclusionNausea was a common symptom in this patient population and many different etiologies were suggested. Most patients reported a lower degree of nausea at follow-up. More research in treatment approaches and specific antiemetics is strongly needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据