Background:We evaluated the efficacy of aprepitant plus granisetron and an increased dose of dexamethasone in selected patients undergoing moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).Methods:Nondrinking women <70 years undergoing MEC were randomly assigned to aprepitant (day 1, 125 mg; days 2 and 3, 80 mg) or placebo. Dexamethasone on days 1–3 was 12, 4, and 4 mg with aprepitant and 20, 8, and 8 mg with placebo. The primary end point was complete response (CR; no emesis or rescue therapy) during 120 h of the first cycle. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of overall CR.Results:Of the 94 patients enrolled, 91 were assessable. Most received carboplatin-based chemotherapy. In the aprepitant (n=45) and placebo (n=46) groups, the overall, acute (day 1), and delayed (days 2–5) CR rates were 62% and 52%, 98% and 96%, and 62% and 52%, respectively. Although not statistically significant, the overall CR rate was 10% higher in the aprepitant group. Both regimens were well tolerated. On multivariate analysis, advanced ovarian cancer (OR, 0.26 (0.10–0.72)) was independently associated with a lower CR.Conclusion:Even with an increased dose of dexamethasone, aprepitant seemed more effective than placebo in these selected patients undergoing MEC; however, delayed phase management remains a significant problem.

Objective While much attention is given to the fifth vital sign, the utility of the 4 classic vital signs (blood pressure, respiratory rate, body temperature, and heart rate) has been neglected. The aim of this study was to assess a possible association between vital signs and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score in patients with sepsis. Methods We performed a prospective, observational study of 206 patients with sepsis. Blood pressure, respiratory rate, body temperature, and heart rate were measured on arrival at the hospital. The SOFA score was also determined on the day of admission. Results Bivariate correlation analysis showed that all of the vital signs were correlated with the SOFA score. Multiple regression analysis indicated that decreased values of systolic blood pressure (multivariate regression coefficient [Coef] = -0.030, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.046 to -0.013) and diastolic blood pressure (Coef = -0.045, 95% CI = -0.070 to -0.019), increased respiratory rate (Coef = 0.176, 95% CI = 0.112 to 0.240), and increased shock index (Coef = 4.232, 95% CI = 2.401 to 6.062) significantly influenced the SOFA score. Conclusion Increased respiratory rate and shock index were significantly correlated with disease severity in patients with sepsis. Evaluation of these signs may therefore improve early identification of severely ill patients at triage, allowing more aggressive and timely interventions to improve the prognosis of these patients.

Patients who have undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for hematological disease experience high mortality when infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine in HSCT patients remain to be investigated. We prospectively evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer BioNTech) in 25 Japanese allogeneic HSCT patients in comparison with 19 healthy volunteers. While anti-S1 antibody titers in almost all healthy volunteers after the second dose were higher than the cut-off value reported previously, levels in HSCT patients after the second dose were diverse. Nineteen patients (76%) had seroconversion of anti-S1 IgG. The median optical density of antibody levels in HSCT patients with low IgG levels (<600 mg/dL), steroid treatment, or low lymphocytes (<1000/μL) was significantly lower than that in the other HSCT patients. There were no serious adverse events (>Grade 3) and no new development or exacerbation of graft-versus-host disease after vaccination. We concluded that the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine is safe and effective in Japanese allogeneic HSCT patients.

Most patients completed the planned chemotherapy. Our protocol could be conducted safely with shorter duration and simpler procedures than previous protocols. Carboplatin desensitization seems beneficial for patients with a history of carboplatin-induced HSRs; however, the risk of HSR recurrence still remains. Desensitization should therefore be performed only by well-trained staff.

No abstract