枢复宁防止由非顺铂化疗所致呕吐的疗效观察

本文报道用枢复宁十地塞米松与灭吐灵十地塞米松随机对照,控制非顺铂化疗诱发的呕吐。58例病人经随机分组后,28例用枢复宁加地塞米松,30例按本院常用剂量灭吐灵加地塞米松治疗。枢复宁十地塞米松对急性恶心和呕吐的完全控制率均显著高于灭吐灵十地塞米松(分别为87％比72％,P<0.05,94％比67％,P<0.001)。对延缓性呕吐的完全控制。枢复宁十地塞米松也高于灭吐灵十地塞米松,分别为85％—94％比58％—82％(P<0.05)。枢复宁十地塞米松副作用轻,主要有头痛(13％)和便秘(9％),不引起锥体外系反应。因此,枢复宁十地塞米松是一个较为有效的联合止吐方案。     

Comparative trial of oral granisetron and intravenous ondansetron in patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer. Study Group of Granisetron

This multicentric randomized trial compared two strategies in the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. The antiemetic efficacy and side effects of oral granisetron, followed by metoclopramide, were compared to those of intravenous (IV) ondansetron followed by oral ondansetron. 198 chemonaive patients with breast cancer, treated with a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, were randomly assigned to receive either oral granisetron 1 mg twice a day on day 1, followed by metoclopramide, 60 mg on day 2 and 3, or ondansetron, 8 mg IV on day 1, followed by ondansetron 8 mg tablet twice a day on day 2 and 3. Both treatments have shown similar control of acute emesis: complete response was achieved in 71% of granisetron group and 66% of ondansetron, and total response in respectively 49% and 53%. However, granisetron plus metoclopramide showed a trend towards better efficacy than oral ondansetron in the prevention of delayed emesis. Furthermore, during the overall study period (day 1 to 5), the percentage of complete responses in the group receiving oral granisetron followed by oral metoclopramide was significantly higher than in the group receiving ondansetron (53% versus 37%; p = 0.022). In conclusion, oral granisetron has shown similar efficacy as IV ondansetron in the prevention of acute emesis induced by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Oral granisetron followed by metoclopramide seems more efficient than IV plus oral ondansetron in the prevention of delayed emesis.     

High efficacy of a single oral dose of ondansetron 8 mg versus a metoclopramide regimen in the prevention of acute emesis induced by fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (FAC) chemotherapy for breast cancer

The aim of our single-center, prospective, randomized, open study was to evaluate the antiemetic efficacy and tolerability of a regimen based on a single oral dose of ondansetron 8 mg in comparison with a metoclopramide-based regimen, for prevention of acute FAC (fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy-induced emesis. A total of 149 chemotherapy-naive, female outpatients, under 50 years of age and with no history of alcohol consumption, scheduled to receive their first cycle of FAC chemotherapy, were included. The patients received either oral ondansetron (8 mg) or metoclopramide (1.5 mg/kg, i.v.), both combined with dexamethasone (16 mg, i.v.) and alprazolam (0.5 mg t.i.d. orally). No antiemetic prophylaxis was given for delayed emesis. Complete control of acute vomiting was obtained in 69/74 (93%) of patients receiving ondansetron, and in 49/75 (65%) of those receiving metoclopramide (p=0.00003). Complete control of acute nausea was obtained in 58% of patients receiving ondansetron and in 36% of those receiving metoclopramide (p=0.007). Complete prevention of delayed vomiting/nausea was achieved in 73%/20% and 60%/16% of patients, respectively. Sedation was more frequent in the metoclopramide arm (p=0.04). As far as we know this is the first study that supports the efficacy of a regimen based on a single oral dose of ondansetron 8 mg in the prevention of acute FAC chemotherapy-induced emesis. The ondansetron regimen was highly effective in female patients and was superior to the metoclopramide based regimen.     

A comparison of ondansetron with alizapride plus methylprednisolone in the control of cisplatin-induced emesis. The French Pneumology Group for the Ondansetron Study.

This randomised, single-blind, parallel-group study was carried out in 48 French pneumology centres to compare the anti-emetic efficacy of ondansetron and an alizapride plus methylprednisolone (ALI/MPS) combination in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin. A total of 220 patients were recruited of whom 209 were evaluable (100 on ondansetron and 109 on ALI/MPS). Thirty minutes before cisplatin, patients received either ondansetron (8 mg i.v.) or alizapride (4 mg/kg i.v.) combined with methylprednisolone (500 mg i.v.). The ondansetron and alizapride injections were repeated 4 and 8 h later. Thereafter, patients received oral ondansetron (8 mg) or alizapride (50 mg) 3 times daily for 5 days. Ondansetron was significantly superior to ALI/MPS in the control of acute emesis (p less than 0.001); 88/100 (88%) of ondansetron, and 69/109 (63%) of ALI/MPS patients experienced less than 3 emetic episodes. Similarly, ondansetron was superior to ALI/MPS for the control of acute nausea (visual analogue scale at 24 h; 13 vs. 22 mm respectively, p = 0.0012). The superiority of ondansetron over days 2-6 was not as great as that over the first 24 h, although there was a trend in favour of ondansetron. More patients treated with ondansetron wished to take the same anti-emetic treatment again (83% for ondansetron vs. 56% for ALI/MPS, p less than 0.001). Both treatments were well tolerated. This study shows that ondansetron is superior to a benzamide-corticosteroid combination in the control of acute cisplatin-induced emesis.     

A single-blind comparison of intravenous ondansetron, a selective serotonin antagonist, with intravenous metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy

Ondansetron (GR 38032F), a selective antagonist of serotonin subtype 3 receptors, is effective in the prevention of emesis associated with cisplatin as well as other chemotherapeutic agents. In this randomized, single-blind, multicenter, parallel group study, we compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) ondansetron with IV metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose (greater than or equal to 100 mg/m2) cisplatin chemotherapy. Three hundred seven patients receiving their first dose of cisplatin, either alone or in combination with other antineoplastic agents, were randomized to receive ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg IV every 4 hours for three doses or metoclopramide 2 mg/kg IV every 2 hours for three doses, then every 3 hours for three additional doses. The study prohibited the concurrent administration of other antiemetics or dexamethasone. Patients receiving ondansetron had a higher rate of complete protection from emesis (40% v 30%, P = .07), a higher complete plus major response rate (65% v 51%, P = .016), a lower rate of failure (21% v 36%, P = .007), and a lower median number of emetic episodes (one v two, P = .005) than did those receiving metoclopramide. The median time to the first emetic episode was longer on ondansetron (20.5 v 4.3 hours, P less than .001). Adverse events occurred in 48% of patients receiving ondansetron and 69% of those receiving metoclopramide (P less than .001). Akathisia and acute dystonic reactions occurred only on metoclopramide; headache (controlled with acetaminophen) was significantly more frequent with ondansetron. Ondansetron is more effective, produces fewer adverse events, and is easier to administer than metoclopramide for the prevention of emesis associated with high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.     

A randomized double-blind comparison of ondansetron and metoclopramide in the prophylaxis of emesis induced by cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and doxorubicin or epirubicin chemotherapy

Seventy-five breast cancer patients scheduled to receive a first course (in a new cycle) of cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and doxorubicin (FAC) or epirubicin (FEC) participated in a double-blind crossover study to compare the antiemetic efficacy and safety of ondansetron (GR38032), a 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist, and metoclopramide. Ondansetron was given as an 8 mg loading dose (4 mg intravenously [IV] plus 4 mg orally) before chemotherapy followed by 8 mg every 8 hours orally for 3 to 5 days. Metoclopramide was given as an 80 mg loading dose (60 mg IV plus 20 mg orally) before chemotherapy followed by 20 mg every 8 hours orally for 3 to 5 days. A "period" interaction in the analysis of emetic response in the first 24 hours necessitated a parallel group analysis of first treatments only, 68 patients being assessable for this parameter. In the first 24 hours, complete or major control (zero to two emetic episodes) of emesis was achieved in 30 of 35 (86%) patients receiving ondansetron and in 14 of 33 (42%) patients receiving metoclopramide (P less than .001). Ondansetron was also more effective in reducing acute nausea. On days 2 to 3, the complete or major responses were significantly better with ondansetron (81% v 65%; P = .033), but there was no statistical difference in the control of nausea. There was a significant patient preference for ondansetron (63% v 26%; P = .001). Extrapyramidal reactions were observed in two metoclopramide treatments; both treatments were otherwise well tolerated. These results are consistent with serotonin (5-HT), being a significant neurotransmitter of cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin- or epirubicin/fluorouracil-induced emesis.     

Oral ondansetron (GR 38032F) for the control of CMF-induced emesis in the outpatient

Summary The efficacy of the serotonin antagonist ondansetron (GR 38032F) was evaluated in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by CMF chemotherapy in 29 breast cancer patients. At their first treatment course of CMF, all given IV on day 1 q 21 days, patients were given oral antiemetic treatment as follows: ondansetron 8 mg, 2 h prior to CMF, repeated after 5 and 10 h the day of chemotherapy and then 8 mg tds for a minimum of 3 days to a maximum of 5 days following chemotherapy. At first course of CMF, complete protection from emesis and nausea was observed in 86.2% and 62% of patients, respectively. At subsequent CMF courses with ondansetron, complete control of emesis was observed in 80% of patients. Side effects were mild and no dystonic reactions were observed. Ondansetron represents an effective, safe, and easily administered outpatient regimen. The addition of a corticosteroid to ondansetron could further improve control of CMF-induced emesis.     

Ondansetron plus dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron alone in the prevention of emesis in chemotherapy-naive and previously treated patients

BACKGROUND: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study assessed whetherthe addition of dexamethasone to ondansetron leads to improvedcontrol of chemotherapy - induced emesis, both in patients undergoingtheir first course of highly emetogenic chemotherapy and inchemotherapypretreated patients refractory to standard anti-emetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either 20 mg dexamethasoneas an intravenous infusion or placebo plus ondansetron 8 mg15 minutes prior to and 4 and 8 hours after the administrationof chemotherapy. According to the randomisation code patientsreceived from day 2 to day 5 either ondansetron 8 mg p.o. +placebo p.o., three times daily, or ondansetron 8 mg p.o. +dexamethasone 4 mg p.o., three times daily. Patients undergoingmultiple-day treatment received intravenous study treatmenton the days of chemotherapy and thereafter oral treatment asoutlined above. RESULTS: A total of 215 patients were entered into the study. Of these,207 were evaluable (111 previously-untreated and 96 previously-treatedpatients). In the chemotherapynaive patients the combinationof ondansetron plus dexamethasone was significantly superiorto ondansetron plus placebo in protecting the patients completelyfrom emesis (retching and vomiting) (81% versus 64%, p –0.04). The mean number of vomiting episodes was significantlylower in the ondansetron-plus-dexamethasone-treated patientsthan in those receiving ondansetron plus placebo (0.8 versus2.1, p – 0.03). In this group of patients there was significantlysuperior protection from emesis on the second day (pvalue –0.04), and a trend towards a better protection on the thirdand fourth days. On each day the active combination offeredbetter protection from nausea with an approximately 20% differencein favor of ondansetron plus dexamethasone. In the group ofestablished vomiters the combination of ondansetron plus dexamethansonewas superior to ondansetron plus placebo in protecting the patientsfrom acute emesis, with 70% versus 48% of the patients beingcompletely protected (p = 0.03). The mean number of vomitingepisodes was significantly lower in the ondansetron-plusdexamethasone-treated-patientsthan in those receiving ondansetron plus placebo (0.9 versus2.1, p = 0.02). In the ondansetron-plus-dexamethasone arm 55%of the patients had complete protection from nausea, retchingand vomiting compared to 35% in the ondansetron-plus-placebo-treatedgroup (p = 0.05). Overall 22% of the patients (20% in the ondansetronplus-placeboand 25% in the ondansetron-plus-dexamethasone arm) experiencedat least one, usually mild, adverse event. More patients inthe ondansetron-plus-dexamethasone arm complained of epigastricpain or burning (8/101 versus 4/112, p-value = 0.16). The differencein patients reporting constipation (6/101 versus 0/112) washighly significant at a p-value of 0.008. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of dexamethasone plus ondansetron is more effectivein protecting chemotherapynaive patients undergoing their firstcourse of highly emetogenic chemotherapy with cisplatin andchemotherapy-pretreated patients refractory to standard antiemeticsfrom chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting compared to ondansetronplus placebo. nausea, vomiting, chemotherapy, ondansetron, dexamethasone, delayed emesis     

A randomized open-label parallel-group study comparing ondansetron with ondansetron plus dexamethasone in patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving high-dose epirubicin. A Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group study

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: The purpose of this multicenter randomized, open-label, parallel-group study was to assess whether the addition of low-dose dexamethasone to ondansetron results in improved control of chemotherapy-induced emesis in patients undergoing first-line chemotherapy with high-dose epirubicin. METHODS & STUDY DESIGN: Patients were randomized to receive either 24 mg of ondansetron or 24 mg of ondansetron plus 8 mg of dexamethasone administered as an intravenous infusion 30 minutes prior to administration of chemotherapy. Both groups of patients received 8 mg of ondansetron given orally from day 2 to 5 two times daily. Fifty-three patients received ondansetron and 50 received ondansetron plus dexamethasone. The patients recorded nausea and the number of vomits and retches daily on diary cards. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the ondansetron plus dexamethasone group experienced neither vomiting nor retching during the first day of the first course of chemotherapy compared to those receiving ondansetron alone (79.6% vs 53.8%, P = 0.0062). Furthermore, there was a trend in favor of ondansetron plus dexamethasone in the control of nausea. There was no statistically significant difference between ondansetron plus dexamethasone versus ondansetron alone in protecting patients from emesis between days 2 and 5 of the first course of chemotherapy (66.7% vs 62.7%, P = 0.68). This was probably due to the small sample size. Ondansetron was well tolerated, with 15 patients (15%) reporting adverse events such as headache or constipation. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that ondansetron given intravenously in combination with dexamethasone is more effective than ondansetron alone in the control of acute emesis in patients undergoing their first course of chemotherapy with high-dose epirubicin. No difference between the regimens was found with regard to nausea and delayed emesis control.     

Ondansetron versus metoclopramide in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting - a metaanalysis

Nausea and vomiting remain important clinical problems occuring in 25 to 50% of patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. Clinical trials comparing a new antiemetic drug, ondansetron, to metoclopramide have suggested improved control of nausea and vomiting but studies disagree on the magnitude of the treatment effect and its statistical significance. We combined evidence from randomized controlled trials in a meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of ondansetron compared to metoclopramide in the prevention of acute (less-than-or-equal-to 24 hours) nausea and emesis associated with chemotherapy. Literature search identified six randomised controlled trials of ondansetron versus metoclopramide in an adult population. Study outcomes were the observed incidence of emesis (vomiting or retching) and patient-reponed grades of nausea after chemotherapy. For meta-analysis of each outcome we defined therapeutic success as complete protection (ie. zero episodes during 24 hours following chemotherapy). The relative odds of success (ondansetron/metoclopramide) was calculated for each trial and all trials combined. Results were expressed as a relative risk (RR) for zero emesis or nausea at 24 hours. The six trials reported on 705 patients (median age range 53-59 years; 57% female). Relative odds for complete control of emesis was greater than one in all trials but was nonsignificant (p>0.05) in two trials, including the largest trial. When trials were combined, summary odds ratios for control of emesis and nausea were greater than one (p<0.05). RR of zero emesis with ondansetron was 1.72 (95% CI 1.45 to 1.97) and was similar for nausea (RR= 1.78, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.13). In trials using high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy, higher rates of extrapyramidal affects and diarrhea were associated with metoclopramide (p<0.05) while headache was frequently associated with ondansetron (p<0.05). Combined clinical trial evidence supports the conclusion. that, relative to metoclopramide, ondansetron places patients at a much lower risk of nausea and emesis following chemotherapy with moderately or highly emetogenic regimens.     

The antiemetic efficacy of methylprednisolone compared with metoclopramide in outpatients receiving adjuvant CMF chemotherapy for breast cancer: a randomized trial

A randomized trial was performed comparing the antiemetic efficacy of methylprednisolone (MPN) and metoclopramide (MCP) in 60 breast cancer patients eligible for outpatient adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-FU (CMF). At the time of their first chemotherapy course patients were randomized to receive either MPN 375 mg or MCP 1 mg/kg both administered in 3 equal doses, IV just prior to chemotherapy and then IM 6 and 12 hours after treatment. Patients receiving MPN experienced significantly less nausea (p less than 0.0005) and vomiting (p less than 0.0005) and antiemetic protection was maintained in patients receiving multiple chemotherapy courses. Complete protection (0 emesis) was observed in 58% of patients receiving MPN as compared with 20% of patients treated with MCP (p less than 0.005). The most frequent side effects were facial flush in 38% of patients and somnolence in 15% of patients receiving MPN and MCP, respectively. Complete protection from CMF-induced gastrointestinal side effects was observed in two-thirds of our patients receiving antiemetic MPN treatment. In these patients administration of the maximum cumulative CMF dose was possible without impairing their quality of life. MPN, at the dose and schedule reported, is an affective antiemetic drug suitable for use in breast cancer outpatients receiving adjuvant CMF therapy.     

Oral ondansetron in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting induced by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in women with breast cancer. Results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND:: The combination of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil(CMF) is a widely used chemotherapy regimen in breast cancerpatients. However, the control of nausea and vomiting inducedby oral CMF is a rarely examined problem. Therefore we felta randomized, placebo controlled study justified in order toimprove currently available antiemetic therapy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS:: In a randomised double-blind trial ondansetron given orally,8 mg three times a day for 15 days, was compared with placeboin 82 breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with CMF(cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m² orally days 1–14, methotrexate40 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8 and 5-fluorourcil 600 mg/m² i.v.days 1 and 8). The patients recorded nausea and the number ofvomits and retches daily on diary cards. Forty-two patientsreceived ondansetron and 40 received placebo. RESULTS:: Significantly more patients who received ondansetron experiencedneither vomiting nor retching (emesis) compared to those receivingplacebo over a 15 day treatment period (60% vs. 35%, p = 0.027).The difference, with 95% confidence limits, was estimated as25 (4.45%). Furthermore, there was a trend in favour of ondansetronin the control of nausea. Ondansetron was well tolerated, with25 patients (59%) reporting at least 1 adverse event comparedto 18 patients (45%) receiving placebo (p = 0.191). CONCLUSION:: The results indicate that ondansetron given orally for 15 daysis safe and effective in the control of emesis induced by CMF.It is however too early to recommend ondansetron as standardantiemetic therapy for oral CMF, as the treatment of nauseaand vomiting in this setting has not been studied thoroughlyenough. prospective, randomized, double-blind trial, ondansetron and placebo, oral CMF-regimen, breast cancer     

Clinical usefulness of ondansetron hydrochloride for nausea and vomiting during repeated courses of chemotherapy for malignant lymphoma--impact of prognosis announcement on anti-emetic effect and evaluation of patient perception of chemotherapy-associated adverse events

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ondansetron hydrochloride (OND) on nausea and vomiting during repeated courses of CHOP or ACOMP-B therapy in patients with malignant lymphoma. The impact of the prognosis announcement on the anti-emetic effect and chemotherapy-associated adverse events was also investigated. Forty-two subjects with malignant lymphoma who underwent CHOP or ACOMP-B therapy including cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 and adriamycin 40 mg/m2 were investigated for a maximum of 6 courses. For acute nausea and vomiting, ondansetron was injected intravenously before the start of chemotherapy on the first day of each course of chemotherapy. For delayed emesis, ondansetron was administered orally for 4 days from the following day. The efficacy on acute nausea and vomiting was found to be 95.0% (1st course), 95.0% (2nd course), 90.9% (3rd course), 88.2% (4th course), 92.3% (5th course) and 91.7% (6th course), respectively. A high efficacy of > or = 85% was also obtained for delayed nausea and vomiting on each day. Though the adverse event of elevated GPT value developed in one subject. It was mild and resolved. No difference in efficacy was seen with or without announcement of prognosis to patients. Following the investigation on antiemetic effect, patient perception of chemotherapy-induced adverse events was evaluated. The most common event was hair loss, followed by taste abnormality and numbness and hyposthesia of the tips of the fingers. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was the 4th and 5th most common, which are less frequent than in the report of Coates in 1983. In conclusion, ondansetron is considered clinically useful with stable anti-emetic effect on both acute and delayed nausea and vomiting over repeated courses of chemotherapy, without any significant safety problem.     

A randomised cross-over trial comparing low-dose metoclopramide and chlorpromazine with high-dose metoclopramide in Chinese patients with advanced cancer receiving cisplatinum and 5-fluorouracil

Summary Nineteen Chinese patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced cancer were studied for chemotherapy-induced acute nausea and vomiting. The chemotherapy consisted of cisplatinum 100 mg/m² i.v. infusion over 4 h on day 1 and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 1000 mg/m² 120-h continuous infusion from day 2 to day 6, repeated every 3 weeks. At the first course of chemotherapy the patients were randomized to receive either low-dose metoclopramide and chlorpromazine or high-dose metoclopramide, and then crossed over for the second course. In the high-dose metoclopramide group there was a suggestion of an earlier onset of emesis, with slightly more frequent retching and vomiting and less food consumed. However, the duration of emesis was shorter in the high-dose group. These differences were not statistically significant. There were no major side effects. Mild salutary drowsiness was noticed in patients receiving low-dose metoclopramide and chlorpromazine. This trial suggests that, in the dosage, route and schedule described, high-dose metoclopramide is no more effective than low-dose metoclopramide together with chlorpromazine in preventing cisplatinum-induced nausea and vomiting. The low-dose scheme is more economic and suitable for patients with advanced cancer.     

枢复宁防止肿瘤化疗所致呕吐的疗效观察

本文报道用枢复宁防止肿瘤化疗所致呕吐,共计３０例,其中１２例在使用枢复宁前曾用灭吐灵（作为自身对照）。结果发现枢复宁组防止化疗呕吐的完全控制率、有效率均显著高于灭吐灵组（分别是６３．３％１６．７％、９６．７％比５８．３％,Ｐ＜０．００）。且其副作用少而轻微。因此,枢复宁是一种安全而有效的止吐剂。     

Optimum anti-emetic therapy for cisplatin induced emesis over repeat courses: Ondansetron plus dexamethasone compared with metoclopramide, dexamethasone plus lorazepam

BACKGROUND:: This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerabilityof ondansetron plus dexamethasone (O+D) with metoclopramideplus dexamethasone plus lorazepam (M+D+L) over three consecutivecourses of cisplatin chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS:: This was an international, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy,parallel group study. O+D patients were randomised to receiveondansetron 8 mg intravenously (i.v.) plus dexamethasone 20mg i.v. prior to cisplatin (50–100 mg/m) chemotherapy.On the following 4 days they were treated with ondansetron 8mg bd orally and dexamethasone 4mg bd orally. M+D+L patientswere randomised to receive metoclopramide 3 mg/kg i.v., dexamethasone20 mg i.v. and lorazepam 1.5 mg/m² i.v. (max 3 mg) prior tocisplatin chemotherapy and a further dose of metoclopramide3 mg/kg i.v. approximately 2 hours following the first doseof metoclopramide. Treatment for the following 4 days was metoclopramide40 mg tds and dexamethasone 4 mg bd orally. Two hundred andthirty-seven patients were recruited into the study (117 patientsreceived O+D and 120 received M+D+L). RESULTS:: On the first course of chemotherapy, O+D was significantly superiorto the M+D+L regimen for complete control of emesis (days 1–5,54% versus 37%, respectively, P = 0.014). This was maintainedover the three treatment cycles; 38% of O+D and 20% of M+D+Lpatients remained free of emesis (P = 0.003). Maintenance ofcontrol of nausea grade as none or mild on days 1–5 overthe three courses was significantly better in the O+D group(48%) than in the M+D+L (26%, P = 0.003). The most commonly occurring adverse events in the O+D groupwere constipation (25%) and headache (19%). In the M+D+L groupdrowsiness (38% of patients), malaise/fatigue (16% of patients),constipation (13% of patients), anxiety (11% of patients) anddizziness (10% of patients) were the most commonly reportedadverse events. Extrapyramidal symptoms were reported by 20%of patients in the M+D+L group. Despite the inclusion of lorazepam,14% of patients in the M+D+L group were withdrawn from the studydue to extrapyramidal symptoms, which in the opinion of theinvestigators, were probably or almost certainly related tostudy medication. CONCLUSIONS:: This study shows that O+D is significantly more effective andbetter tolerated than M+D+L for the control of emesis and nauseaover a series of three courses of cisplatin chemotherapy. cisplatin, emesis, nausea, ondansetron, repeated treatments     

The efficacy and safety of once-daily Kytril (granisetron hydrochloride) tablets in the prophylaxis of nausea and emesis following fractionated upper abdominal radiotherapy.

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily oral granisetron 2 mg (n = 134) and placebo (n = 126) as prophylaxis for nausea and emesis in patients receiving upper abdominal fractionated radiotherapy. Patients were scheduled to receive 10-30 fractions of radiotherapy; granisetron (two 1-mg tablets) or placebo was administered 1 hr before radiotherapy on each scheduled treatment day. Treatment comparisons were made at 24 hr and at 10 and 20 fractions. Patients treated with granisetron experienced greater emetic control than those treated with placebo as evidenced by median times to first emesis (35 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001) and first nausea (11 vs. 1 day, p < 0.001). Overall endpoint analysis showed that proportionally more granisetron than placebo patients were emesis free (57.5% vs. 42.1%, p = 0.0047) and nausea free (30.6% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.0042). Furthermore, 25% more granisetron-treated than placebo-treated patients were emesis free and 20% more were nausea free on at least 80% of study treatment days. The most commonly reported adverse experiences in granisetron-treated patients were diarrhea, asthenia, and constipation. These findings demonstrate that a once-daily, 2-mg dose of oral granisetron is well tolerated and significantly more effective than placebo in preventing nausea and emesis induced by fractionated radiotherapy to the upper abdomen.     

A multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial comparing ondansetron versus ondansetron plus dexamethasone in the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis

The aim was to compare the efficacy of ondansetron and a combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone in the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis over three consecutive courses of chemotherapy. Cancer patients scheduled to receive for the first time cisplatin (>50 mg/m(2)) in combination with other cytotoxic agents, were recruited in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind study and treated with ondansetron 8 mg i.v. and dexamethasone 20 mg i.v. Twenty-four hours after the start of chemotherapy, patients were randomised to treatment either with oral ondansetron 8 mg bd plus placebo on days 2-5 (group A) or with oral ondansetron 8 mg bd plus oral dexamethasone 8 mg bd on days 2-3, and 4 mg bd on days 4 and 5 (group B). Two hundred and thirty-six cancer patients were recruited into the study. Complete protection from delayed vomiting/nausea in group A and group B was Obtained in 50/39% and in 63/42% of patients, respectively in the first course; in 55/34% and in 64/40% in the second and in 49/31% and 60/37% in the third. Logistic regression analysis reveals a statistically significant difference in incidence of emesis between the combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone and ondansetron alone (P<0.05). The same model, however, shows no difference in incidence of nausea between the two treatment regimens. Ondansetron plus dexamethasone reduces the risk of delayed emesis following cisplatin chemotherapy as compared to ondansetron alone.     

A randomised placebo controlled study with ondansetron in patients undergoing fractionated radiotherapy

BACKGROUND:: There are few randomised studies comparing anti-emetic drugsfor the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients treatedwith fractionated radiotherapy. The aim of the study was tocompare the anti-emetic efficacy of 8 mg dose ondansetron twicea day with placebo. MATERIALS AND METHODS:: One hundred eleven patients who were to commence a course of10 or more daily fractionated radiotherapy including the abdomenwere included in the study. The patients recorded daily emesis,nausea and bowel habit and graded weekly symptoms of nausea,vomiting, diarrhoea and lack of appetite. The EORTC C30 questionnairewas completed. RESULTS:: 67% of patients given ondansetron had complete control of emesiscompared with 45% of patients with placebo (P <0.05). Thenumber of emetic episodes recorded on the worst day was 1.4for the ondansetron group and 3.1 for the placebo group (P <0.01).Patients given ondansetron had fewer days with emesis and nauseacompared with placebo (P <0.05). The mean sum score of patientsweekly grading of symptoms showed that the ondansetron grouphad less inconvenience than the placebo group (P <0.05).This difference persisted during the first three weeks, butnot thereafter. Similarly, some quality of life measures showedsignificant differences in favour of the ondansetron group.More patients (n = 13) withdrew due to lack of efficacy in theplacebo group compared with patients (n = 8) in the ondansetrongroup. CONCLUSION:: The present study illustrates that prophylactic anti-emeticadministration of ondansetron is effective in preventing nauseaand vomiting in patients undergoing fractionated radiotherapyof the abdomen. diarrhoea, emcsis, fractionated radiotherapy, ondansetron, quality of life     

Incidence, course, and severity of delayed nausea and vomiting following the administration of high-dose cisplatin

Although many trials have evaluated the severity and treatment of nausea and vomiting immediately after cisplatin administration, no studies have focused on vomiting occurring more than 24 hours after chemotherapy--delayed emesis. Two consecutive trials were undertaken to evaluate the incidence, course (trial 1), and severity (trial 2) of delayed nausea and emesis and to develop methods to study these conditions. Eighty-six patients receiving cisplatin (120 mg/m2) for the first time were entered. On the day of cisplatin treatment, all received intravenous (IV) metoclopramide (3 mg/kg X 2 doses) plus dexamethasone (20 mg IV X 1 dose) with either diphenhydramine (50 mg IV) or lorazepam (1.0 to 1.5 mg/m2). Sixty-two percent of patients experienced no vomiting during the 24 hours immediately after administration of cisplatin. Overall, 93% of studied patients experienced some degree of delayed nausea or vomiting from 24 to 120 hours after cisplatin. In trial 1, the incidence of delayed vomiting ranged from 21% to 61% and delayed nausea from 24% to 78% in 58 patients. The highest incidence of both delayed nausea and emesis occurred during the period from 48 to 72 hours after administration of cisplatin. Patients who had no emesis during the initial 24 hours after cisplatin were less likely to experience delayed emesis. The severity of delayed nausea and vomiting was evaluated in 28 patients in trial 2. The amount of delayed nausea and vomiting was assessed daily by patients using a visual analogue scale and by an observer rating. The highest nausea and vomiting scores were seen during the period from 48 to 72 hours after administration of cisplatin, with acceptable correlation between patient scores and observer ratings. Although the nausea and vomiting occurring 24 or more hours after cisplatin administration is not as severe as that seen during the initial 24 hours after administration of cisplatin in patients not receiving antiemetics, it is a common condition that merits both further study and specific treatment.