Physician concordance with update to ASCO guidelines for antiemetic use with carboplatin AUC ≥ 4.

Authors

null

Rudolph M. Navari

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Rudolph M. Navari , Kathryn Jean Ruddy , Thomas William LeBlanc , Rebecca Anne Clark-Snow , Rita S. Wickham , Gary Binder , Tammy Bratton Coberly , Ravi C. Potluri , Luke M. Schmerold , Eric Roeland

Organizations

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Mayo Clinic, Department of Oncology, Rochester, MN, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, Oncology Consultant, KS, Rush University College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, Helsinn Therapeutics, Inc., Iselin, NJ, SmartAnalyst Inc., New York, NY, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: In 2017, NCCN (2/2017) and ASCO (8/2017) each amended antiemetic guidelines to classify carboplatin AUC ≥4 as highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), recommending upfront triple prophylaxis with an NK1 receptor antagonist (RA) + 5HT3 RA + dexamethasone. Physician concordance with the new recommendations, and the consequences for avoidable post-chemotherapy acute care, merit study. Methods: In a large electronic health record database (IBM Explorys), we identified carboplatin courses of therapy (≥14-day cycles as a proxy for AUC ≥4) and courses with ≥7-day cycles of other HEC and non-HEC therapy from 4Q 2012 through August 2018. Guideline concordance, defined as triple prophylaxis at HEC initiation, was evaluated. We also assessed 30-day post-chemotherapy acute care (inpatient or emergency department) associated with nausea or vomiting (NV) or eight other toxicities deemed avoidable in the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid’s new oncology outcome measure OP-35. Results: 11,554 carboplatin courses were identified. Before the guideline change, rates of upfront triple prophylaxis grew from 14% in 2013 to 16% in mid-2017. Rates then rose to 26% by 1Q 2018 before dropping to 21% by 3Q 2018; quarterly rates averaged 20% (range 15%-26%) following the guideline change. In 31% of carboplatin courses we noted 30-day acute care use, of which 75% involved ≥1 of the ten OP-35 toxicities. NV (with or without acute care use) was reported in 24% of courses, and 27% of total OP-35 acute care events involved NV. Rates for NV, and for OP-35-related and NV-related acute care after carboplatin, were similar to rates after other HEC chemotherapy, and higher than rates after other non-HEC IV chemotherapy or oral HEC/MEC agents. Conclusions: Use of upfront triple antiemetic prophylaxis has increased only marginally for carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 since its 2017 re-classification as HEC in national guidelines, perhaps due to low awareness of the change. Patients receiving carboplatin had similar rates of NV and related 30-day acute care events as seen for other HEC, confirming that the new HEC definition fits clinical experience. More triple prophylaxis use is needed to reduce NV and NV-related avoidable acute care seen with carboplatin AUC ≥ 4.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2019 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Symptoms and Survivorship

Track

Symptom Science and Palliative Care

Sub Track

Palliative Care and Symptom Management

Citation

J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl; abstr 11595)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.11595

Abstract #

11595

Poster Bd #

287

Abstract Disclosures