PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Emma Dean AU - Richard Berman AU - Shaun Villa TI - P-101 Solstice: sancuso® in supportive and palliative?care; a feasibility study in patients with cancer and refractory nausea and vomiting AID - 10.1136/bmjspcare-2017-00133.100 DP - 2017 Mar 01 TA - BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care PG - A37--A38 VI - 7 IP - Suppl 1 4099 - http://spcare.bmj.com/content/7/Suppl_1/A37.2.short 4100 - http://spcare.bmj.com/content/7/Suppl_1/A37.2.full SO - BMJ Support Palliat Care2017 Mar 01; 7 AB - Background Nausea and vomiting (N and V) are common, debilitating symptoms in patients with cancer, often precipitating inpatient admission for subcutaneous/intravenous antiemetics and re-hydration. Currently, there are no evidence-based solutions and treatment algorithms differ across clinical practice. Some of these patients will experience difficulty swallowing tablets and/or are unable to keep oral medications down. Treatments for patients with cancer may also reduce the ability of the intestines to absorb medicines within a tablet.SANCUSO® (Granisetron Transdermal System [transdermal skin patch]) is indicated for the prevention of (N and V) in patients receiving moderately and/or highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. The SANCUSO® patch delivers consistent, predictable levels of granisetron throughout five days with smoother daily pharmacokinetics compared to daily dosing. The role of Sancuso in patients with cancer and refractory N and V which is unrelated to chemotherapy has not been explored.Methods An open-label, randomised feasibility study comparing Sancuso with ‘physician’s choice’ of antiemetic in patients with cancer and refractory N and V. A feasibility study is required at this juncture as standard antiemetic treatment in this patient population is undefined, and the therapeutic efficacy of Sancuso requires appraisal before embarking on a larger randomised trial. To assess feasibility, objectives have been categorised into the four domains; (i) Recruitment - assess the number of patients approached, consent rate, number of eligible patients and explore the methods used to identify potential patients (ii) Patients - willingness to participate and acceptability of the intervention (iii) Clinicians’ - ability to recruit, which physician’s choice is selected, experience including monitoring of prescribing practice in the control arm (iv) Trial procedures - determine the appropriate primary outcome, adherence/compliance ratesImplications We aim to determine whether this approach is feasible and warrants further investigation in a larger randomised Phase II trial leading to a confirmatory multi-centre randomised Phase III trial to include a cost-effectiveness appraisal.