ABSTRACT
Background: Cancer is a multi-cellular disease which can arise from any cell type and organs. Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are undesirable consequence of cancer chemotherapeutic drugs. A great importance has to be given for their assessment, detection, monitoring, reporting and preventing these ADR for the beneficial effects of the patients. So the present study was undertaken for the purpose of detecting and quantifying those adverse reactions which is of some importance in therapeutic setting.Methods: A prospective observational study conducted in chemotherapy ward, male and female patients of any age receiving cancer chemotherapy and presenting with ADR’s in duration of 3 months.Results: 160 patients were observed. Out of 160 patients 123 presented with ADR’s. Most common ADR’s were loss of appetite (67.6), diarrhea (61.8%), vomiting (21.5%), nausea (17.7%), anemia (24.7%). Cisplatin, paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, doxorubicin, gefitinib are common drugs causing ADR’s.Conclusions: Cancer chemotherapeutic drugs are associated with various adverse reactions. This study shows the importance of active monitoring of these reactions and measures to prevent their effects early in the treatment of cancer.
ABSTRACT
Background: Chemotherapy induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) is one the most common adverse effects associated with chemotherapeutic management of carcinoma breast. Preventing CINV becomes a vital part in treatment of these cancer patients for better compliance. The conventional regimen of newer 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone along with newer agents - Aprepitant, a NK-1 receptor antagonist and a recently approved atypical antipsychotic, Olanzapine have shown better control of CINV. These newer agents are effective but also very expensive.Methods: The study included carcinoma breast patients scheduled for chemotherapy (n = 55 in each group) who either received aprepitant or olanzapine or a combination of both as the anti-emetic regimen. Considering Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), the cost included was the cost of anti-emetic agents (sponsor’s perspective) and outcome measured as control of nausea and vomiting - as Complete Protection (CP), Complete Response to Best (CRB) and Incomplete Response (IR) for acute (0-24 hours) and delayed (24-120 hours) phases. The cost effectiveness(CE) ratio for emesis and CINV free days were calculated.Results: CP was seen better during the acute period than the delayed period. With Aprepitant, delayed CRB and IR was seen with 13 (23.6%) and 10 (18.2%) subjects. 16 (29.1%) showed IR with Olanzapine during the delayed period.The average number of Emesis and CINV free days were 4.65, 4.51, 4.89 and 3.38, 3.96, 4.15 for the three groups respectively. The cost required to achieve 1 emesis and 1 CINV free day per subject in the 3 groups was INR 351.19, INR 27.20, INR 339.54 and INR 483.36, INR 30.94, INR 400.60 respectively.Conclusions: The newer anti-emetic even though being expensive at cost, pharmacoeconomically provide better outcomes and seem to have better control rates than the conventional regimen.