ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Global inequitable distribution of seminal studies of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.
Review in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains one of the most quality of life limiting toxicities of cancer therapy. Decades of trials have produced robust antiemetic evidence, but their applicability to resource-limited settings where guideline-recommended regimens are frequently inaccessible has not been characterized.
methodsWe reviewed the reference lists of the 2023 MASCC/ESMO, 2025 NCCN, and 2020 ASCO antiemetic guidelines to identify all primary research articles cited as evidence for antiemetic therapy. Review articles were excluded. For each study, we extracted country of origin, income classification, age, sex distribution, primary cancer type, chemotherapy regimen, chemotherapy emetogenicity, and antiemetic regimen. Findings were synthesized descriptively.
resultsFrom the reference list, 213 articles were identified. Two could not be retrieved and one was identified as a review, leaving 210 studies for extraction. When the same patient population was reported across multiple studies, the reports were consolidated and represented by the most comprehensive study, resulting in 195 unique populations for analysis. Most studies enrolled patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (63.1%), followed by moderately emetogenic (27.2%), minimally emetogenic (8.7%), and low emetogenic (1.0%) regimens. The evidence base was overwhelmingly derived from high-income countries (HICs): Of 191 studies with a determinate income classification, 82.7% originated in HICs and only 17.3% in low- and middle-income countries, persisting across every emetogenicity category.
conclusionsThe evidence supporting contemporary CINV guidelines is concentrated in high-income settings. As alternative, lower-cost antiemetic regimens for resource-limited settings are derived from this same evidence base, further studies are needed to assess their effectiveness in these settings.
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.