Side effects associated with the use of dexamethasone for prophylaxis of delayed emesis after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8017 Background: The role of dexamethasone to reduce delayed emesis following highly emetogenic chemotherapy is proven, but there is less evidence of benefit after mild-moderately emetogenic regimens. Here, we develop and evaluate a Dexamethasone Symptom Questionnaire [DSQ] to assess the side effects of dexamethasone in the week after patients receive moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Methods: After optimization with a focus group, 60 patients receiving oral dexamethasone for delayed prophylaxis of emesis after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer completed and then evaluated the DSQ. Results: Patients reported that the DSQ was worded clearly and addressed items important to them. Patients receiving dexamethasone reported moderate-severe problems with insomnia (45%), indigestion/epigastric discomfort (27%), agitation (25%), increased appetite (18%), weight gain (17%) and acne (15%) in the week following chemotherapy. (See table) Conclusions: The side effects of dexamethasone may outweigh its benefits when used with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy as prophylaxis for delayed nausea and vomiting. A randomized, double-blind crossover trial is underway to determine the effect of dexamethasone on nausea and vomiting, and the impact of side-effects of dexamethasone and of nausea and vomiting, on quality of life. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".