TY - JOUR
T1 - Multi-day vs single-day dexamethasone for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting
T2 - systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Chow, Ronald
AU - Celio, Luigi
AU - Im, James
AU - Caini, Saverio
AU - Eng, Lawson
AU - Prsic, Elizabeth
AU - Scotté, Florian
AU - Aapro, Matti
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.
PY - 2024/11/1
Y1 - 2024/11/1
N2 - Introduction: Over the past decade, several randomized controlled trials have compared single-day dexamethasone (dexamethasone-sparing) regimens to the current standard multi-day dexamethasone antiemetic regimen for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone-sparing regimens to standard multi-day dexamethasone, used for the prophylaxis of CINV. Methods: Ovid Medline and Embase were searched from database inception to March 2024. Studies were included if they reported on randomized controlled trials of adult cancer patients receiving different scheduling of dexamethasone, for the endpoints of complete response, complete control, no nausea, no vomiting, and no use of rescue medication. Safety was also assessed. Meta-analysis, leave-one-out meta-analysis, and cumulative meta-analysis were conducted to generate summary effect estimates and assess the influence of single trials on the summary effect estimate. Results: Ten trials reporting on 2234 patients were included. Dexamethasone-sparing regimens were found to be no different to control arm in the acute (Risk Ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94–1.08), delayed (RR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89–1.05) and overall phases (RR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.90–1.06) for complete response. There was likewise no difference for complete control, no nausea, no vomiting, and no use of rescue medication. Safety profile was similar. There was no concern for bias in the published literature. No difference was found between studies reporting on anthracycline/cyclophosphamide-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Conclusion: In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, dexamethasone-sparing regimens were found to be no different to current multi-day regimens with respect to efficacy and safety for MEC and anthracycline/cyclophosphamide-based regimens. Clinicians and future guidelines should strongly consider greater adoption and endorsement of dexamethasone-sparing regimens.
AB - Introduction: Over the past decade, several randomized controlled trials have compared single-day dexamethasone (dexamethasone-sparing) regimens to the current standard multi-day dexamethasone antiemetic regimen for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone-sparing regimens to standard multi-day dexamethasone, used for the prophylaxis of CINV. Methods: Ovid Medline and Embase were searched from database inception to March 2024. Studies were included if they reported on randomized controlled trials of adult cancer patients receiving different scheduling of dexamethasone, for the endpoints of complete response, complete control, no nausea, no vomiting, and no use of rescue medication. Safety was also assessed. Meta-analysis, leave-one-out meta-analysis, and cumulative meta-analysis were conducted to generate summary effect estimates and assess the influence of single trials on the summary effect estimate. Results: Ten trials reporting on 2234 patients were included. Dexamethasone-sparing regimens were found to be no different to control arm in the acute (Risk Ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94–1.08), delayed (RR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89–1.05) and overall phases (RR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.90–1.06) for complete response. There was likewise no difference for complete control, no nausea, no vomiting, and no use of rescue medication. Safety profile was similar. There was no concern for bias in the published literature. No difference was found between studies reporting on anthracycline/cyclophosphamide-based highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Conclusion: In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, dexamethasone-sparing regimens were found to be no different to current multi-day regimens with respect to efficacy and safety for MEC and anthracycline/cyclophosphamide-based regimens. Clinicians and future guidelines should strongly consider greater adoption and endorsement of dexamethasone-sparing regimens.
KW - Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting
KW - Dexamethasone
KW - Dexamethasone-sparing
KW - Efficacy
KW - Prophylaxis
KW - Safety
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85206986904&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00520-024-08934-0
DO - 10.1007/s00520-024-08934-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 39432169
AN - SCOPUS:85206986904
SN - 0941-4355
VL - 32
JO - Supportive Care in Cancer
JF - Supportive Care in Cancer
IS - 11
M1 - 736
ER -