预防儿童化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的止吐药:系统综述和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
R Walker, S Dias, R S Phillips
{"title":"预防儿童化疗引起的恶心和呕吐的止吐药:系统综述和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。","authors":"R Walker, S Dias, R S Phillips","doi":"10.1007/s00520-024-08939-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Children continue to experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), despite effective antiemetic medications. Recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are underpinned by narrative syntheses and meta-analyses that compare only two treatments. This means not all antiemetics have been compared to one another, and estimates remain imprecise. We apply network meta-analysis (NMA) to overcome these limitations by comparing multiple treatments simultaneously.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review identified and critically appraised RCTs comparing antiemetics recommended and licensed for the prevention of CINV in children. Bayesian NMA compared and ranked antiemetic effectiveness for the outcomes complete (CR) and partial response (PR) in the acute, delayed, and overall phases, nausea, and decreased food intake. Antiemetics given with and without dexamethasone were compared in separate networks as their underlying populations differed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen RCTs (3115 patients receiving moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)) were included. When given with dexamethasone, NK1 antagonists with ondansetron ranked highest for CR and PR in the acute and overall phases, PR in the delayed phase, and decreased food intake. Post hoc analysis shows further a benefit of adding olanzapine to regimens of aprepitant and ondansetron. Ondansetron ranked lower than palonosetron, for CR in the delayed and overall phases, and ondansetron was less effective than palonosetron for nausea prevention. Rankings for other regimens, including those given without dexamethasone, were uncertain or inconsistent across outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings serve to support the current recommendations of olanzapine (when given with aprepitant and ondansetron) and NK1 antagonists' regimens receiving HEC, but note that evidence of a significant difference in relative benefit, between patients receiving MEC and HEC, does not yet exist. Recommendations for palonosetron as the preferred 5HT3 antagonists may be extended, particularly, to those who are at high risk of nausea.</p>","PeriodicalId":22046,"journal":{"name":"Supportive Care in Cancer","volume":"32 11","pages":"747"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513750/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antiemetic medications for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"R Walker, S Dias, R S Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00520-024-08939-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Children continue to experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), despite effective antiemetic medications. Recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are underpinned by narrative syntheses and meta-analyses that compare only two treatments. This means not all antiemetics have been compared to one another, and estimates remain imprecise. We apply network meta-analysis (NMA) to overcome these limitations by comparing multiple treatments simultaneously.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review identified and critically appraised RCTs comparing antiemetics recommended and licensed for the prevention of CINV in children. Bayesian NMA compared and ranked antiemetic effectiveness for the outcomes complete (CR) and partial response (PR) in the acute, delayed, and overall phases, nausea, and decreased food intake. Antiemetics given with and without dexamethasone were compared in separate networks as their underlying populations differed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen RCTs (3115 patients receiving moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)) were included. When given with dexamethasone, NK1 antagonists with ondansetron ranked highest for CR and PR in the acute and overall phases, PR in the delayed phase, and decreased food intake. Post hoc analysis shows further a benefit of adding olanzapine to regimens of aprepitant and ondansetron. Ondansetron ranked lower than palonosetron, for CR in the delayed and overall phases, and ondansetron was less effective than palonosetron for nausea prevention. Rankings for other regimens, including those given without dexamethasone, were uncertain or inconsistent across outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings serve to support the current recommendations of olanzapine (when given with aprepitant and ondansetron) and NK1 antagonists' regimens receiving HEC, but note that evidence of a significant difference in relative benefit, between patients receiving MEC and HEC, does not yet exist. Recommendations for palonosetron as the preferred 5HT3 antagonists may be extended, particularly, to those who are at high risk of nausea.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supportive Care in Cancer\",\"volume\":\"32 11\",\"pages\":\"747\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11513750/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Supportive Care in Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08939-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supportive Care in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08939-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:尽管有有效的止吐药物,但儿童仍会经历化疗引起的恶心和呕吐(CINV)。临床实践指南中的建议以叙述性综述和荟萃分析为基础,仅对两种治疗方法进行比较。这意味着并非所有的止吐药都进行过比较,因此估算结果仍不精确。我们采用网络荟萃分析(NMA)同时比较多种治疗方法,以克服这些局限性:一项系统性综述确定并严格评估了研究性临床试验,这些研究比较了为预防儿童 CINV 而推荐和许可的止吐药。针对急性期、延迟期和总体期的完全应答 (CR) 和部分应答 (PR)、恶心和进食量减少等结果,贝叶斯 NMA 对止吐药的有效性进行了比较和排序。使用和不使用地塞米松的止吐药在不同的网络中进行比较,因为它们的基础人群不同:结果:共纳入了 16 项 RCT(3115 名接受中度(MEC)或高度致吐化疗(HEC)的患者)。在与地塞米松同时使用时,NK1拮抗剂与昂丹司琼在急性期和总体期的CR和PR、延迟期的PR以及食物摄入量的减少方面均名列前茅。事后分析表明,在阿普瑞坦和昂丹司琼治疗方案中加入奥氮平可进一步提高疗效。昂丹司琼在延迟期和总体期的CR排名低于帕洛诺司琼,昂丹司琼在预防恶心方面的效果低于帕洛诺司琼。其他治疗方案(包括不使用地塞米松的治疗方案)在不同结果中的排名不确定或不一致:我们的研究结果支持目前关于奥氮平(与阿培司坦和昂丹司琼合用时)和 NK1 拮抗剂治疗 HEC 的建议,但也注意到尚无证据表明接受 MEC 和 HEC 治疗的患者在相对获益方面存在显著差异。帕洛诺司琼(palonosetron)作为首选 5HT3 拮抗剂的建议可扩大适用范围,尤其是适用于恶心风险较高的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Antiemetic medications for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Purpose: Children continue to experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), despite effective antiemetic medications. Recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are underpinned by narrative syntheses and meta-analyses that compare only two treatments. This means not all antiemetics have been compared to one another, and estimates remain imprecise. We apply network meta-analysis (NMA) to overcome these limitations by comparing multiple treatments simultaneously.

Methods: A systematic review identified and critically appraised RCTs comparing antiemetics recommended and licensed for the prevention of CINV in children. Bayesian NMA compared and ranked antiemetic effectiveness for the outcomes complete (CR) and partial response (PR) in the acute, delayed, and overall phases, nausea, and decreased food intake. Antiemetics given with and without dexamethasone were compared in separate networks as their underlying populations differed.

Results: Sixteen RCTs (3115 patients receiving moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC)) were included. When given with dexamethasone, NK1 antagonists with ondansetron ranked highest for CR and PR in the acute and overall phases, PR in the delayed phase, and decreased food intake. Post hoc analysis shows further a benefit of adding olanzapine to regimens of aprepitant and ondansetron. Ondansetron ranked lower than palonosetron, for CR in the delayed and overall phases, and ondansetron was less effective than palonosetron for nausea prevention. Rankings for other regimens, including those given without dexamethasone, were uncertain or inconsistent across outcomes.

Conclusions: Our findings serve to support the current recommendations of olanzapine (when given with aprepitant and ondansetron) and NK1 antagonists' regimens receiving HEC, but note that evidence of a significant difference in relative benefit, between patients receiving MEC and HEC, does not yet exist. Recommendations for palonosetron as the preferred 5HT3 antagonists may be extended, particularly, to those who are at high risk of nausea.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Supportive Care in Cancer
Supportive Care in Cancer 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
751
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Supportive Care in Cancer provides members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and all other interested individuals, groups and institutions with the most recent scientific and social information on all aspects of supportive care in cancer patients. It covers primarily medical, technical and surgical topics concerning supportive therapy and care which may supplement or substitute basic cancer treatment at all stages of the disease. Nursing, rehabilitative, psychosocial and spiritual issues of support are also included.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信