» Articles » PMID: 39238137

Clinical Practice Guideline-inconsistent Chemotherapy-induced Vomiting Prophylaxis in Pediatric Cancer Patients in Community Settings: A Children's Oncology Group Study

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to determine the proportion of patients receiving clinical practice guideline (CPG)-inconsistent care related to chemotherapy-induced vomiting (CIV) prophylaxis, and to describe the association between CPG-inconsistent care and site size. The association between delivery of CPG-inconsistent care and patient outcomes (CIV control, admission prolongation, and unplanned healthcare visits) was also described.

Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted at Children's Oncology Group (COG) National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) sites. Eligible patients received highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) as inpatients from January 2014 through December 2015, and were previously enrolled in a COG study. The COG generated a patient list from which patients were randomly selected for chart review by participating sites. A central panel adjudicated CIV prophylaxis received as CPG-consistent or -inconsistent.

Results: Twenty-four sites participated. Over half of patients received CPG-inconsistent CIV prophylaxis (HEC: 59/112, 52.6%; MEC: 119/215, 55.3%). The most common reasons for CPG-inconsistency were shortened duration of antiemetic administration or omission of dexamethasone. Site size was not found to be associated with CPG-inconsistent care delivery (HEC: adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.23; MEC: adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.92-1.24). Additionally, there was no statistically significant association between receipt of CPG-inconsistent care and patient outcomes.

Conclusions: Patients receiving MEC or HEC often received CPG-inconsistent CIV prophylaxis. Site size was not associated with receipt of CPG-inconsistent care. Future studies should evaluate strategies to improve CIV control among pediatric oncology patients including those aimed at improving CPG adherence.

Citing Articles

A roadmap to implementing machine learning in healthcare: from concept to practice.

Yan A, Guo L, Inoue J, Arciniegas S, Vettese E, Wolochacz A Front Digit Health. 2025; 7:1462751.

PMID: 39906065 PMC: 11788154. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1462751.

References
1.
Aapro M, Caprariu Z, Chilingirov P, Chrapava M, Curca R, Gales L . Assessing the impact of antiemetic guideline compliance on prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: Results of the nausea/emesis registry in oncology (NERO). Eur J Cancer. 2022; 166:126-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.01.028. View

2.
Kent E, Mitchell S, Castro K, DeWalt D, Kaluzny A, Hautala J . Cancer Care Delivery Research: Building the Evidence Base to Support Practice Change in Community Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33(24):2705-11. PMC: 4559611. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.60.6210. View

3.
Nieuwlaat R, Bertil Olsson S, Lip G, Camm A, Breithardt G, Capucci A . Guideline-adherent antithrombotic treatment is associated with improved outcomes compared with undertreatment in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. The Euro Heart Survey on Atrial Fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2007; 153(6):1006-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.03.008. View

4.
Herrstedt J, Clark-Snow R, Ruhlmann C, Jordan K, Scotte F . MASCC/ESMO antiemetic guidelines: Introduction to the 2023 guidelines update. Support Care Cancer. 2023; 32(1):57. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08219-y. View

5.
Hesketh P, Kris M, Basch E, Bohlke K, Barbour S, Clark-Snow R . Antiemetics: ASCO Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2020; 38(24):2782-2797. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.01296. View