@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:02001659,
 author = {Ozone, Sachiko and Ichikawa, Kazuya and Morise, Masahiro and Matsui, Akira and Kinoshita, Fumie and Matsuzawa, Reiko and Koyama, Junji and Tanaka, Ichidai and Hashimoto, Naozumi},
 issue = {4},
 journal = {Nagoya Journal of Medical Science},
 month = {Nov},
 note = {Carboplatin (CBDCA)-induced emetic risk is currently classified on the basis of CBDCA-area under the curve (CBDCA-AUC). We investigated the utility of three CBDCA dosage parameters for predicting emesis by CBDCA. Patients with thoracic cancer treated with CBDCA were included. The endpoints were complete response (CR) and total control (TC). CR was defined as no vomiting and no use of rescue medication during the overall assessment period, whereas TC was defined as no vomiting, nausea, nor use of rescue medication during the overall assessment period. The parameters of CBDCA were defined as follows: (1) CBDCA-AUC; (2) CBDCA/body surface area (BSA): the administered dose of CBDCA per body surface area (mg/m2); and (3) total CBDCA/body: the total administered dose of CBDCA (mg). Eighty-five patients were evaluated. The median CBDCA/BSA but not CBDCA-AUC was higher in patients with non-CR compared to those with CR. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the AUC of CBDCA/BSA for predicting non-CR was higher than that of CBDCA-AUC. CBDCA/BSA shows greater potential for predicting CBDCA-induced emetic risk compared with CBDCA-AUC, which is the parameter in current antiemetic guidelines.},
 pages = {773--785},
 title = {Is area under the curve the best parameter for carboplatin induced emetic risk stratification?},
 volume = {83},
 year = {2021}
}