↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of olanzapine for the prophylaxis and rescue of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of olanzapine for the prophylaxis and rescue of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00520-016-3075-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonard Chiu, Ronald Chow, Marko Popovic, Rudolph M. Navari, Nathan M. Shumway, Nicholas Chiu, Henry Lam, Milica Milakovic, Mark Pasetka, Sherlyn Vuong, Edward Chow, Carlo DeAngelis

Abstract

Olanzapine is a potent antipsychotic medication that inhibits a wide variety of receptors. It has been used in trials for the prophylaxis and rescue of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This study systematically investigates the efficacy of olanzapine in relation to other antiemetics in the prophylaxis and rescue of CINV. A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing olanzapine to other standard antiemetics for either prevention or rescue. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving no emesis or no nausea, in the acute, delayed, and overall phases. Ten RCTs in the preventative setting and three RCTs in the breakthrough setting were identified. Subgroup analysis demonstrated a similar degree of benefit from a 5- and 10-mg dose of olanzapine for the no emesis endpoint in the overall phase. In the prophylaxis setting, olanzapine was statistically superior in five of six endpoints and clinically superior in four of six endpoints. In the breakthrough setting, olanzapine was statistically and clinically superior in the only endpoint analyzed: no emesis. Olanzapine is more efficacious than other standard antiemetics for the rescue of CINV and its inclusion improves control in the prevention setting. Given the possible reduction in side effects, the use of a 5-mg dose of olanzapine should be considered. Future RCTs should compare the 5-mg versus the 10-mg dosages further and report on the efficacy and percentage of patients developing side effects. Further analyses should be done without the influence of corticosteroids.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 84 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 9 10%
Other 9 10%
Student > Master 8 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 19 22%
Unknown 25 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Unspecified 3 3%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 29 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,707,237
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#511
of 4,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,033
of 395,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#6
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 395,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.