Ondansetron Rapidly Dissolving Film for the Prophylactic Treatment of Radiation-Induced Nausea and Vomiting—A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of an ondansetron rapidly dissolving film (rdf) in the prophylaxis of radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (rinv). Rapidly dissolving film formulations facilitate drug delivery in circumstances in which swallowing the medication might be difficult for the patient. METHODS: Patients undergoing palliative radiotherapy at risk for rinv were prescribed ondansetron rdf 8 mg twice daily while on treatment and were asked to complete a nausea and vomiting-specific daily diary, the Functional Living Index-Emesis (flie), and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C15 Palliative (qlq-C15-pal). Patients were categorized as receiving primary or secondary prophylaxis based on whether they had already experienced emetic episodes. "Overall control" was defined as a maximum increase of 2 episodes of nausea or vomiting from baseline. "Acute phase" was defined as the days during radiation until the first day after radiation; "delayed phase" was defined as days 2-10 after radiation. RESULTS: The study accrued 30 patients. Rates of overall control for nausea and for vomiting during the acute phase in the primary prophylaxis group were 88% and 93% respectively; during the delayed phase, they were 73% and 75%. Rates of overall control for nausea and for vomiting during the acute phase in the secondary prophylaxis group were both 100%; during the delayed phase, they were 50%. The number of nausea and vomiting episodes was found to be significantly correlated with the flie and qlq-C15-pal questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron rdf is effective for the prophylaxis of rinv.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".