↓ Skip to main content

Antiemetic efficacy and safety of granisetron or palonosetron alone and in combination with a corticosteroid for ABVD therapy-induced nausea and vomiting

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antiemetic efficacy and safety of granisetron or palonosetron alone and in combination with a corticosteroid for ABVD therapy-induced nausea and vomiting
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40780-017-0097-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mayako Uchida, Tsutomu Nakamura, Kojiro Hata, Hiroyuki Watanabe, Yasuo Mori, Koji Kato, Kenjiro Kamezaki, Katsuto Takenaka, Motoaki Shiratsuchi, Keiko Hosohata, Toshihiro Miyamoto, Koichi Akashi

Abstract

Antiemetic effects and safety of granisetron or palonosetron alone and in combination with a corticosteroid against chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) were retrospectively evaluated in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma receiving adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) therapy. A total of 39 patients were eligible for this study. Before ABVD therapy, granisetron or palonosetron was intravenously administered with or without a corticosteroid (dexamethasone or hydrocortisone) and aprepitant. The proportions of patients with complete control (CC) during the overall (0-120 h after the start of ABVD therapy), acute (0-24 h) and delayed (24-120 h) phases were evaluated. CC was defined as no vomiting and no use of antiemetic rescue medication with only grade 0-1 nausea. Granisetron and palonosetron were administered in 21 and 18 patients, respectively. The CC rate during the acute, delayed and overall phases was not statistically different between the two groups. The CINV was completely controlled during overall phase in 58.3% of patients receiving granisetron or palonosetron in combination with a corticosteroid, whereas in 11.1% of those without co-treatment of a corticosteroid (P < 0.05). There were significantly higher frequencies of anorexia, leucopenia and neutropenia in the palonosetron group. There is a statistically significant difference in the frequency of febrile neutropenia between presence and absence of a corticosteroid (p = 0.024). These findings suggested that a combination use of a corticosteroid with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist was preferable for CINV control in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma receiving ABVD therapy, although the careful management of febrile neutropenia is required. The study approval numbers in the institution; 24-12 and 24-359. Registered April 17, 2012 and June 21, 2012.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Engineering 2 11%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,964,325
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences
#64
of 147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,671
of 443,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 147 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 443,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them