Observational studySupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2018
Incidence of nausea and vomiting in breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy regimens in Italy: NAVY observational study.
Observational study in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting guideline adherence in pediatric and adult patients: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Aprepitant use during chemotherapy and association with survival in women with early breast cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Mechanisms and benefits of phytochemicals as an alternative therapeutic strategy in female cancers.Chinese herbal medicines · 2025Review
- Palonosetron in pediatric patients: A single-center, retrospective evaluation of policy and clinical practice guideline discordance.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2025Article
- Netupitant-palonosetron (NEPA) for Preventing Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting: From Clinical Trials to Daily Practice.Current cancer drug targets · 2022Review
- Effect of Abdominal Massage with and withoutJournal of oncology · 2021Article
- Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV): A Short Review on the Role of Netupitant-Palonosetron (NEPA).Core evidence · 2020Review
- Evolving role of neurokinin 1-receptor antagonists for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.OncoTargets and therapy · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common adverse event with cancer chemotherapy, despite the availability of effective antiemetic agents. This is a prospective observational study of Italian breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC), assessed CINV incidence, adherence to national antiemetic guidelines (AIOM 2012), and the relationship with CINV outcomes.
methodsPatients with breast cancer scheduled to receive their first cycle of an AC-based regimen were enrolled at 12 Italian centers and their clinical data prospectively recorded. CINV incidence was assessed from patient diaries after the first chemotherapy cycle. The relationship between guideline adherence and CINV outcomes was examined using multiple logistic regression.
resultsThe overall incidence rates of nausea and vomiting among 246 evaluable patients were 63.0 and 25.4%, respectively. Most patients received a 5-HT3-RA agent and dexamethasone for acute phase CINV prophylaxis, whereas a triple combination including aprepitant (NK1-RA), consistent with national guidelines, was used in only 45.5% of cases. In the delayed phase, the guideline adherence was 48.8%, while the overall adherence was 43.5%. After adjusting for confounding factors, adherence to antiemetic prophylaxis guidelines was associated with a significant reduction in the odds of three endpoints, namely any nausea, "significant nausea," and vomiting (OR = 0.49, OR = 0.54, and OR = 0.48, respectively), and a 90% increase in the odds of overall complete protection (OR = 1.90).
conclusionsCINV is still a critical issue in AC-treated patients, despite antiemetic treatment. Non-adherence to antiemetic guidelines may lead to poorer outcomes and indicates the need for strategies to enhance the use of guidelines in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.