Literature DB >> 23877927

Use of glucose solution for the alleviation of gemcitabine-induced vascular pain: a double-blind randomized crossover study.

Hiroki Nagai1, Toshiyuki Kitano, Takafumi Nishimura, Hiroyasu Yasuda, Kazumi Nakata, Sachie Takashima, Masashi Kanai, Shigemi Matsumoto, Yukiko Mori, Yuichi Kakudo, Hiroyasu Sato, Takuhiro Yamaguchi, Kaoru Kameno, Young Hak Kim, Michiaki Mishima, Kazuhiro Yanagihara.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine is widely used for chemotherapy in many types of cancers. However, vascular pain frequently occurs during its infusion, which can be serious enough to cause treatment discontinuation. This study was conducted to determine whether dissolution with 5 % glucose solution would relieve vascular pain compared with the approved use of saline as the diluent.
METHODS: Patients with cancer who were treated with weekly gemcitabine were eligible. Vascular pain was assessed during two consecutive administrations in a double-blind, randomized crossover study. One group was scheduled to receive gemcitabine dissolved in saline followed by gemcitabine in 5 % glucose solution. In the other group, 5 % glucose solution was followed by saline. The primary endpoint was frequency of vascular pain for the total infusions of each solvent and the secondary endpoints were intensity, as assessed on a visual analogue scale and duration of vascular pain.
RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were randomly assigned to each treatment schedule. Frequency of vascular pain was significantly lower with 5 % glucose solution compared with saline (40 versus 63 %; p < 0.001). The intensity of vascular pain was also reduced with 5 % glucose solution compared with saline (mean, 1.3 versus 2.7 points; p < 0.001). There was no significant statistical difference in duration of vascular pain between the 5 % glucose solution and saline solution groups (mean, 21 versus 18 min; p = 0.420).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of 5 % glucose solution to dissolve gemcitabine significantly reduced the frequency and the intensity of vascular pain compared with the use of saline.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23877927     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-013-1901-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  13 in total

1.  Treatment of inoperable and/or metastatic biliary tree carcinomas with single-agent gemcitabine or in combination with levofolinic acid and infusional fluorouracil: results of a multicenter phase II study.

Authors:  V Gebbia; F Giuliani; E Maiello; G Colucci; F Verderame; N Borsellino; G Mauceri; M Caruso; M L Tirrito; M Valdesi
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-10-15       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Prevention of venous pain and phlebitis caused by epirubicin hydrochloride.

Authors:  Masakazu Sugimoto; Masateru Matsui; Masanori Harada; Yumiko Yamauchi; Nao Moriyama; Kanae Andou; Makoto Yamamoto; Hisayo Yamaoka; Chiemi Ono; Mami Ishikawa; Nobuyuki Kamo; Tadashi Ikeda; Keiko Yamaoka
Journal:  Gan To Kagaku Ryoho       Date:  2009-06

3.  Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus cisplatin alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  A B Sandler; J Nemunaitis; C Denham; J von Pawel; Y Cormier; U Gatzemeier; K Mattson; C Manegold; M C Palmer; A Gregor; B Nguyen; C Niyikiza; L H Einhorn
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Photodegradation of dacarbazine.

Authors:  G M Baird; M L Willoughby
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1978-09-23       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Sugar solution analgesia: the effects of glucose on expressed mu opioid receptors.

Authors:  George R Kracke; Katherine A Uthoff; Joseph D Tobias
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study.

Authors:  H von der Maase; S W Hansen; J T Roberts; L Dogliotti; T Oliver; M J Moore; I Bodrogi; P Albers; A Knuth; C M Lippert; P Kerbrat; P Sanchez Rovira; P Wersall; S P Cleall; D F Roychowdhury; I Tomlin; C M Visseren-Grul; P F Conte
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Physical and chemical stability of gemcitabine hydrochloride solutions.

Authors:  Q Xu; Y Zhang; L A Trissel
Journal:  J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash)       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug

8.  Dacarbazine (DTIC) in malignant melanoma: reduced toxicity with protection from light.

Authors:  O M Koriech; V S Shükla
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 9.  A review of age differences in the neurophysiology of nociception and the perceptual experience of pain.

Authors:  Stephen J Gibson; Michael Farrell
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.442

10.  Gemcitabine and carboplatin in carcinoma of unknown primary site: a phase 2 Adelaide Cancer Trials and Education Collaborative study.

Authors:  K B Pittman; I N Olver; B Koczwara; D Kotasek; W K Patterson; D M Keefe; C S Karapetis; F X Parnis; S Moldovan; S J Yeend; T J Price
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.