Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40074887›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

Efficacy of triplet antiemetic prophylaxis against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with soft tissue sarcomas receiving consecutive-day doxorubicin and ifosfamide therapy.

Yunami Yamada, Hirotoshi Iihara, Akihito Nagano, Hironori Fujii, Masanori Tsugita, Ryo Hoshino, Koki Hara, Ryo Kobayashi, Haruhiko Akiyama, Akio Suzuki

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Yunami YamadaDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Hirotoshi IiharaDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan. iihara.hirotoshi.p7@f.gifu-u.ac.jp.
Akihito NaganoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan.
Hironori FujiiDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Masanori TsugitaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan.
Ryo HoshinoDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Koki HaraDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Ryo KobayashiDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.
Haruhiko AkiyamaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan.
Akio SuzukiDepartment of Pharmacy, Gifu University Hospital, 1-1 Yanagido, Gifu, Gifu, 501-1194, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDoxorubicin and ifosfamide (AI) therapy for soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is given as a 5-day continuous-dose chemotherapy regimen, and classified as carrying high emetic risk. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of triplet antiemetic prophylaxis, consisting of a 5-HT PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients who received AI therapy for STS between October 2011 and October 2022 were included in this retrospective study. Patients who did not receive the standard triplet antiemetic prophylaxis of granisetron, DEX, and aprepitant were excluded. Primary endpoint was the rate of complete response (CR) and secondary endpoint was the rate of significant nausea prevention during the acute (days 1-6), delayed (days 7-10), and overall (days 1-10) periods. In addition, CR rate and significant nausea prevention during the acute phase were compared before and after the addition of OLZ in patients who received OLZ as antiemetic prophylaxis in the subsequent cycle due to poor antiemetic control.

resultsA total of 58 patients were analyzed. CR rate for all patients was 32.8% in the acute phase, 53.4% in the delayed phase, and 29.3% in the overall period. The significant nausea prevention rate was 19.0%, 43.1%, and 13.8%, respectively. Sixteen patients received additional OLZ as an antiemetic prophylaxis. Their CR rate before and after the addition of OLZ during the acute phase improved significantly, from 6.3 to 43.8% (P = 0.041). The rate of significant nausea prevention tended to improve, from 6.3 to 43.8% (P = 0.077).

conclusionControl of CINV with granisetron, DEX, and aprepitant was poor in patients with STS receiving AI therapy. Addition of OLZ to this standard triplet antiemetic prophylaxis may improve CINV control in the subsequent cycle in patients who experience inadequate CINV control during their first cycle of AI therapy.

Indexed as

AntiemeticsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsNauseaSarcomaVomitingAdultAgedDexamethasoneDoxorubicinFemaleHumansIfosfamideMaleMiddle AgedNeurokinin-1 Receptor AntagonistsOlanzapineAntiemeticsDexamethasoneDoxorubicinIfosfamideNeurokinin-1 Receptor AntagonistsOlanzapineSerotonin 5-HT3 Receptor AntagonistsChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomitingDoxorubicinIfosfamideOlanzapineSoft tissue sarcomas

Identifiers

PMID40074887

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.