Literature DB >> 2589233

Effective control of CMF-related emesis with high-dose dexamethasone: results of a double-blind crossover trial with metoclopramide and placebo.

C F Pollera1, M Nardi, P Marolla, P Pinnaró, E Terzoli, D Giannarelli.   

Abstract

To establish the antiemetic activity of both dexamethasone (DXM) and metoclopramide (MCP) in patients receiving i.v. cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF), 25 women with stage II breast cancer were entered into this study. A randomized, double-blind, crossover design was employed to evaluate DXM (24 mg in 5 doses) versus MCP (1 mg/kg as a single dose) versus a combination of both drugs (as above) or placebo (PLC). The patients were requested to complete a questionnaire evaluating the antiemetic effect. All but one patient completed the planned antiemetic program during the first four CMF courses. As compared to PLC, both the DXM-MCP combination and DXM alone provided a higher complete antiemetic protection rate (p = 0.01 and p = 0.006, respectively). The DXM regimens were more effective than both PLC (p = 0.004 and p = 0.01) and MCP (p = 0.002 and p = 0.006) in reducing the prevalence of severe vomiting. As compared to MCP, the DXM regimens provided a better control of the nausea (p less than 0.04 and p less than 0.01) and reduced both the episodes and the duration of vomiting (p less than 0.02 and p less than 0.05). The DXM regimens were also associated with a better patient opinion than the PLC (p less than 0.002 and p less than 0.0002). No significant differences were found between MCP and PLC, nor between the DXM regimens. Except for two dystonic reactions, MCP-related toxicity was mild, whereas that induced by DXM was negligible in patients with no contraindications to corticosteroids. As employed in this study, DXM provided safe and effective antiemetic protection for patients receiving adjuvant i.v. CMF. Data available do not support the use of a short-course MCP, either alone or in combination with DXM. The search for better antiemetic treatments is mandatory, especially for patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. To date, we recommend the use of DXM as a standard regimen and as a control for further studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2589233     DOI: 10.1097/00000421-198912000-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0277-3732            Impact factor:   2.339


  7 in total

Review 1.  Comparative studies of various antiemetic regimens.

Authors:  F Roila; M Tonato; E Ballatori; A Del Favero
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 2.  Antiemetics in cancer chemotherapy: historical perspective and current state of the art.

Authors:  M Tonato; F Roila; A Del Favero; E Ballatori
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 3.  Ondansetron. An update of its therapeutic use in chemotherapy-induced and postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Authors:  Anthony Markham; Eugene M Sorkin
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  [Management of chemotherapy-induced emesis: what is the standard after 20 years of clinical research].

Authors:  A Du Bois
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1998-01

Review 5.  Reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Current perspectives and future possibilities.

Authors:  A Del Favero; F Roila; M Tonato
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Investigating the effect of emetic compounds on chemotaxis in Dictyostelium identifies a non-sentient model for bitter and hot tastant research.

Authors:  Steven Robery; Janina Mukanowa; Nathalie Percie du Sert; Paul L R Andrews; Robin S B Williams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Granisetron compared with prednisolone plus metopimazine as anti-emetic prophylaxis during multiple cycles of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

Authors:  T Sigsgaard; J Herrstedt; L J Andersen; H Havsteen; S W Langer; A G Kjaerbøl; H Lund; M Kjaer; P Dombernowsky
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 7.640

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.