Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39106066›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2024

Olanzapine as Antiemetic Prophylaxis in Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Vikas Ostwal, Anant Ramaswamy, Sarika Mandavkar, Prabhat Bhargava, Deepali Naughane, Sharon Flavia Sunn, Sujay Srinivas, Akhil Kapoor, Bal Krishna Mishra, Anuj Gupta and 18 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Postoperative nausea and vomiting as a predictor of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in gynecologic cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Evaluation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in low, moderate, and highly emetogenic schemes between sexes.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Observational
  12. MASCC antiemetic consensus recommendations: resource-limited settings.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  13. 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

28 authors.

Vikas OstwalDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Anant RamaswamyDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sarika MandavkarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Prabhat BhargavaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Deepali NaughaneDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sharon Flavia SunnDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sujay SrinivasDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Akhil KapoorDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Varanasi, India.
Bal Krishna MishraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Varanasi, India.
Anuj GuptaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Varanasi, India.
Bipinesh SansarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Varanasi, India.
Vikash PalMedical Oncology, AIG Hospitals, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, India.
Aparajita PandeyDepartment of Medical Oncology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Varanasi, India.
Avinash BondaMedical Oncology, AIG Hospitals, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, India.
Indraja SiripurapuMedical Oncology, AIG Hospitals, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, India.
Vamshi Krishna MudduMedical Oncology, AIG Hospitals, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, India.
Sadhana KannanDepartment of Statistics, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Deepali ChauguleMedical Oncology, AIG Hospitals, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, India.
Rajshree PatilDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Manali ParulekarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Aditya DhanawatDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Mehek TrikhaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Jaya GhoshDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Vanita NoronhaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Nandini MenonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Vijay PatilDepartment of Medical Oncology, PD Hinduja Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India.
Kumar PrabhashDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Ian OlverSchool of Psychology I Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The role of olanzapine has not been adequately evaluated in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimens with or without neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists. Objective: To evaluate whether addition of olanzapine to an MEC regimen reduces nausea, vomiting, and use of nausea rescue medications among patients with solid malignant tumors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, open-label phase 3 randomized clinical trial included patients aged 18 years or older with solid malignant tumors who were receiving oxaliplatin-, carboplatin-, or irinotecan-based chemotherapy. The trial was conducted at 3 institutes in India from March 26, 2019, to August 26, 2023; the final cutoff date for analysis was September 10, 2023. Exposure: Patients were randomized 1:1 to dexamethasone, aprepitant, and palonosetron with olanzapine (experimental group) or without olanzapine (observation group). The experimental group received 10 mg of olanzapine orally once at night on days 1 through 3 of the chemotherapy regimen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was complete response (CR), defined as the proportion of patients with no vomiting, no significant nausea (scored as <5 on a visual analog scale of 1 to 100), and no use of rescue medications for nausea. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients experiencing nausea and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), receiving rescue medications, and experiencing adverse events. Results: A total of 560 patients (259 [64%] male; median age, 51 years [range, 19-80 years]) were randomized. The analysis included 544 patients with evaluable data (274 assigned to olanzapine and 270 to observation). Baseline characteristics were evenly matched between the 2 groups. The proportion of patients with CR was significantly greater in the group with (248 [91%]) than without (222 [82%]) olanzapine in the overall 120-hour treatment period (P = .005). Likewise, there were significant differences between the olanzapine and observation groups for nausea control (264 [96%] vs 234 [87%]; P < .001) and CINV (262 [96%] vs 245 [91%]; P = .02) during the overall assessment period, and the proportion of patients receiving rescue medications significantly increased in the observation group (30 [11%]) compared with the olanzapine group (11 [4%]) (P = .001). Grade 1 somnolence was reported by 27 patients (10%) following administration of chemotherapy and olanzapine and by no patients in the observation group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of olanzapine significantly improved CR rates as well as nausea and vomiting prevention rates in chemotherapy-naive patients who were receiving MEC regimens containing oxaliplatin, carboplatin, or irinotecan. These findings suggest that use of olanzapine should be considered as one of the standards of care in these chemotherapy regimens. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI) Identifier: CTRI/2018/12/016643.

Indexed as

AntiemeticsNauseaNeoplasmsOlanzapineVomitingAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsAprepitantDexamethasoneFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsAprepitantDexamethasoneOlanzapinePalonosetron

Identifiers

PMID39106066
PMCPMC11304110

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.