Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22733373›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2012

Efficacy and safety of palonosetron as salvage treatment in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC).

Paul J Hesketh, Gary Morrow, Anna W Komorowski, Raza Ahmed, David Cox

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. 2016 Updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus Recommendations: Controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. A prospective, observational, multicenter study on risk factors and prophylaxis for low emetic risk chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Paul J HeskethDepartment of Hematology Oncology, Lahey Clinic Medical Center, Burlington, MA 01805, USA. Paul.Hesketh@Lahey.org
Gary Morrow
Anna W Komorowski
Raza Ahmed
David Cox
Eisai (United States) · USHematology Oncology Associates · USLahey Hospital and Medical Center · USUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) palonosetron in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients with cancer who had incomplete control of CINV during their previous cycle of low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC).

methodsPatients with histologically or cytologically confirmed cancer, ≥18 years of age, with a Karnofsky Performance Scale score of ≥50% who had received LEC that induced vomiting and/or at least moderate nausea during their previous treatment cycle received palonosetron 0.25 mg IV 30 min before chemotherapy. Outcomes were recorded in patient diaries over 120 h and at an end-of-study visit on days 6, 7, or 8 after LEC administration. The primary efficacy variable was the complete response rate, defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication at 0-24 h (acute post-chemotherapy phase), 24-120 h (delayed phase), and 0-120 h (overall).

resultsComplete responses among the intent-to-treat study population (n = 34) were recorded for 88.2 % of patients in the acute phase, 67.6% in the delayed phase, and 67.6% overall. No emetic episodes occurred in 91.2 and 79.4% of patients during the acute and delayed phases, respectively, and no nausea in 73.5 and 52.9%, respectively. Palonosetron was well tolerated; only two patients experienced treatment-related adverse events.

conclusionsAmong the patients with cancer who had a history of CINV with LEC, palonosetron was effective in preventing CINV in both the acute and delayed post-chemotherapy phases, and was well tolerated. Randomized comparative studies in larger populations of patients receiving LEC are needed to confirm these findings.

Indexed as

Salvage TherapyAgedAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleHumansIsoquinolinesMaleMiddle AgedNauseaPalonosetronPatient SafetyPilot ProjectsQuinuclidinesTreatment OutcomeVomitingAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsIsoquinolinesPalonosetronQuinuclidines

Identifiers

PMID22733373
OpenAlexW2067359094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.