Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31013182›Full record

Trial reportJournal of global oncology2019

Randomized Phase II Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Haloperidol and Olanzapine in the Control of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Nepal.

Soniya Dulal, Bishnu Dutta Paudel, Prakash Neupane, Aarati Shah, Bibek Acharya, Bishesh Sharma Poudyal, Ramila Shilpakar, Lori Anne Wood

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of global oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Olanzapine (10 mg vs 5 mg vs 2.5 mg) for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 8 countries.

Soniya DulalNational Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bishnu Dutta PaudelNational Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Prakash NeupaneThe University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS.
Aarati ShahNational Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bibek AcharyaNational Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bishesh Sharma PoudyalCivil Service Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Ramila ShilpakarNational Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Lori Anne WoodQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
AstraZeneca (Canada) · CAPfizer (United Kingdom) · GBAstraZeneca (Spain) · ESBristol-Myers Squibb (Canada) · CAMSD (UK) Limited (United Kingdom) · GBNational Academy of Medical Sciences · NP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of the study was to compare efficacy and toxicity of olanzapine (OLN; a higher-cost drug) and haloperidol (HAL; a lower-cost drug) in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients who receive highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). PATIENTS AND

methodsIn a randomized, phase II trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either OLN 10 mg orally on days 1 to 4 or HAL 1 mg orally on day 1 and 0.5 mg twice daily on days 2 to 4. Both groups received ondansetron 16 mg and dexamethasone 12 mg intravenously on day 1. Patients recorded their nausea using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and recorded daily episodes of vomiting from day 1 to day 5. The primary end point was complete nausea prevention (CNP; ie, ESAS of 0). Secondary end point was complete emesis prevention (CEP).

resultsSixty-five patients were randomly assigned, and 64 received their allocated treatment (n = 32 in each arm). There was no difference in CNP during the overall period (days 1 to 5) between OLN and HAL (68.7%

conclusionIn this study, HAL had comparable efficacy to OLN in the management of CINV, which suggests that it is the higher-value option in patients who receive HEC in resource-scarce countries.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravenousAdministration, OralAdultAntiemeticsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDexamethasoneDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHaloperidolHumansMaleMiddle AgedNauseaNeoplasmsOlanzapineOndansetronAntiemeticsDexamethasoneHaloperidolOlanzapineOndansetron

Identifiers

PMID31013182
PMCPMC6528728
OpenAlexW2942182297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.