ArticleScientific reports2025
Effectiveness of antiemetic regimens in controlling chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting during hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of antiemetic regimens in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients with haematological malignancies undergoing highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) as part of conditioning for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). A prospective cohort study was conducted from November 2022 to July 2024 at University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville (Spain). Adult patients receiving HEC or MEC conditioning regimens were assessed for CINV control using a symptom questionnaire adapted from the validated questionnaire Pro-CTCAE. Effectiveness was measured by complete response (CR) and complete protection (CP) from nausea/emesis across acute (chemotherapy days) and delayed (five days post-chemotherapy) phases. Bitherapy (5HT3 receptor antagonists + corticosteroids) and monotherapy regimens were compared. 112 patients were included. Of 102 analysed patients, CR and CP were achieved in 42.1% and 34.3% of patients in the acute phase, and 33.3% and 30.4% in the delayed phase, respectively. Patients receiving bitherapy (who received myeloablative conditioning regimens and high-emetogenic regimens) achieved better CINV control compared to those treated with monotherapy (who received reduced-intensity and moderate emetogenic treatments). With significant improvements in acute CR (p = 0.0003) and CP (p = 0.001). Additionally, Rescue antiemetic use was lower in the bitherapy group (p = 0.230). This study reinforces the importance of assessment of antiemetic response in these patients and highlights the effectiveness of bitherapy with 5HT3 receptor antagonists and corticosteroids. However, our findings also suggest that antiemetic regimens could be optimised with strategies possibly involving triple therapy or the integration of other agents.
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.