Placebo-controlled phase III study comparing dexamethasone on day 1 to on day 1-3 with NK<sub>1</sub> receptor antagonist and palonosetoron in high emetogenic chemotherapy.

Matsuzaki, Kunihiro; Ito, Yuka; Fukuda, Mamoru; Sakamaki, Kentaro; Ando, Masahiko; Kojima, Yasuyuki; Furuya, Naoki; Tsuda, Takashi; Minatogawa, Hiroko; Ichikawa, Yasushi; Ohta, Ichiro; Takei, Saori; Tokuda, Yutaka; Narui, Kazutaka; Tsuboya, Ayako; Suda, Takashi; Morita, Satoshi; Yamanaka, T.; Boku, Narikazu; Nakajima, Takako Eguchi

doi:10.1200/jco.2016.34.15_suppl.10019

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nine studies, [8,10,15–21] with 1968 cases were included in our meta-analysis (The flowchart was presented in PRISMA Flow Diagram). Three trials [22–24] were excluded because of repetitive data. Considering the heterogeneity and progress of chemotherapy and treatment options, 1 trial [25] was excluded.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Xie

Ren

et al. 2019

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:We performed a meta-analyisis to evaluate the efficacy of maintenance dexamethasone against acute or delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving moderately or highly emetic risk chemotherapy regimen.Methods:PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. Data comparing maintenance dexamethasone with single-dose dexamethasone during the acute, delayed, and overall phase of CINV were extracted. Overall risk ratio (RR) was used to estimate the efficacy and adverse effects.Results:Nine studies were included. In delayed phase, maintenance dexamethasone has similar efficacy to single-dose dexamethasone for no emetic episodes (RR, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.14), complete response (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.98–1.11), complete control (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98–1.16), and total control (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.91–1.23). In overall phase, maintenance dexamethasone has similar efficacy to single-dose dexamethasone for no emetic episodes (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94–1.11), complete response (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 -1.09), complete control (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.94–1.13), total control (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90–1.23), and no rescue medication (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97–1.19). Maintenance dexamethasone was only superior to single-dose dexamethasone for no rescue medication during delayed phase (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01–1.21, P = .034). The incidence of hiccup was observed higher in maintenance dexamethasone group (RR = 3.16, 95% CI, 1.12–8.92).Conclusion:The single-dose dexamethasone regimen offers high and similar overall control of symptoms as the maintenance dexamethasone regimen in this population. Multiple-day dexamethasone was suitable for patients who used rescue medication during the delayed phase.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Xie

Ren

et al. 2019

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Guidelines versus individualized care for the management of CINV

Clemons

2018

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous groups have published guidelines for the prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The current management of CINV, however, remains suboptimal, due in part to poor adherence to existing antiemetic guidelines. Challenges in clinical trial design have also slowed progress and complicated the selection of optimal antiemetic therapy. In addition, patient-specific characteristics and factors are not included in current CINV guidelines and are an important contributor to an individual’s risk for nausea and vomiting. CINV risk prediction algorithms have now emerged and provide the opportunity to individualize antiemetic prophylaxis. Further studies are underway to examine the precise role for risk model-guided antiemetic prophylaxis in patients with cancer.

show abstract

Olanzapine for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Navari

Loprinzi

2016

N Engl J Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Placebo-controlled phase III study comparing dexamethasone on day 1 to on day 1-3 with NK₁ receptor antagonist and palonosetoron in high emetogenic chemotherapy.

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Guidelines versus individualized care for the management of CINV

Olanzapine for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Placebo-controlled phase III study comparing dexamethasone on day 1 to on day 1-3 with NK1 receptor antagonist and palonosetoron in high emetogenic chemotherapy.

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Dexamethasone-sparing regimen is an effective and safe alternative in overall antiemetic protection

Guidelines versus individualized care for the management of CINV

Olanzapine for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Placebo-controlled phase III study comparing dexamethasone on day 1 to on day 1-3 with NK₁ receptor antagonist and palonosetoron in high emetogenic chemotherapy.