Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29248965›Full record

Trial reportMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2017

Effectiveness of olanzapine in patients who fail therapy with aprepitant while receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Nikita Mehra, Prasanth Ganesan, Trivadi S Ganesan, Surendran Veeriah, Abirami Boopathy, Venkatraman Radhakrishnan, Manikandan Dhanushkodi, Swaminathan Rajaraman, Sevaluxmy Ganesharajah, Tenali Gnana Sagar

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nikita MehraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Prasanth GanesanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India. prasanth.ganesan@cancerinstitutewia.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2762-6591
Trivadi S GanesanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Surendran VeeriahDepartment of Psycho-oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Abirami BoopathyDepartment of Psycho-oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Venkatraman RadhakrishnanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Manikandan DhanushkodiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Swaminathan RajaramanBiostatistics and Tumor Registry, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Sevaluxmy GanesharajahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Tenali Gnana SagarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600020, India.
Cancer Institute (WIA) · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemotherapy-induced nausea-vomiting (CINV) compromises the quality of life of patients with cancer. We present data on the effectiveness of olanzapine after failure of aprepitant in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). A single-center prospective study was conducted, where patients ≥ 18 years who failed aprepitant, palonosetron, dexamethasone (APD) received olanzapine, palonosetron and dexamethasone (OPD) in the subsequent cycle of HEC. Failure of APD was defined as occurrence of ≥ grade 2 acute and/or delayed nausea ± vomiting. Response rates were compared with what was achieved in their previous cycle with the use of APD in the acute (0-24 h), delayed (24-120 h) and overall (0-120 h) periods after the start of HEC. Impact on life was assessed using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI). Fifty-five patients failed APD and received OPD in the subsequent cycle; 54 were evaluable for response. Complete response rate for OPD versus APD is 80 versus 20% (acute period), 90 versus 18% (delayed period) and 74 versus 5% (overall period), and no nausea rate for OPD versus APD is 57 versus 13% (acute), 59 versus 15% (delayed) and 48 versus 0% (overall period), p < 0.001 for all comparisons. MDASI scores showed significant improvement after switching to OPD. A mild increase in drowsiness noted in patients receiving OPD did not affect daily life in most patients. In patients receiving HEC and failing CINV prophylaxis with APD, switching to OPD regimen in the subsequent cycle greatly improves control of vomiting, increases "no nausea" rates and significantly reduces symptom severity scores.

Indexed as

AdolescentAgedAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsAprepitantBenzodiazepinesHumansMiddle AgedMorpholinesNauseaOlanzapineProspective StudiesTreatment FailureVomitingYoung AdultAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsAprepitantBenzodiazepinesMorpholinesOlanzapineAprepitantChemotherapyNauseaOlanzapineVomiting

Identifiers

PMID29248965
OpenAlexW2774883090

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.