Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
In Vivo · October 29, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background/Aim: Although dexamethasone (DEX) is essential for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for cervical cancer, prolonged administration carries risks of adverse events. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of a shortened DEX duration (steroid-sparing therapy) on the total control (TC) of nausea and vomiting in patients with cervical cancer undergoing CCRT comprising cisplatin 40 mg/m2 to avoid the risk of adverse effects associated with DEX administration. Patients and Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study included 579 patients with cervical cancer who underwent CCRT between January 2016 and March 2024. Patients were classified into the steroid- sparing (DEX day 1; N=80) and non-steroid-sparing (DEX days 1-3; N=499) groups. TC was defined as the absence of vomiting and nausea without rescue medication during the entire CCRT period. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used for between-group comparisons to adjust for potential confounders. Results: The baseline rate of olanzapine use was significantly higher in the steroid-sparing group [28.8% vs. 10.6% (non-steroid-sparing group); p<0.001]. TC rates during the entire CCRT period were 30.0% and 36.5% in the steroid and non-steroid-sparing groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference in the overall TC period [odds ratio (OR)=0.826; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.480-1.420; p=0.490] was observed. Furthermore, propensity score matching analysis adjusted for olanzapine use, radiation dose, and other covariates confirmed these findings (OR=0.736; 95% CI=0.370-1.460; p=0.381). However, the TC rate during the delayed phase in the non-steroid-sparing group (71.7%) was higher than that in the steroid-sparing group (60.0%), indicating an increased risk of treatment failure (OR=0.591; p=0.035). This difference was not statistically significant after Bonferroni correction (significance threshold: p<0.0125). Furthermore, propensity score-matched univariate analysis confirmed no significant difference in the delayed phase between the two groups (p=0.243). Conclusion: Steroid-sparing therapy did not compromise TC rates, suggesting that it may be a clinically acceptable option for patients undergoing CCRT. However, individualized risk assessment and appropriate antiemetic use remain essential.