Title
A randomized, multicenter study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of tropisetron, a new <tex>$5-HT_{3}$</tex>receptor antagonist, with a metoclopramide-containing antiemetic cocktail in the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis A randomized, multicenter study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of tropisetron, a new <tex>$5-HT_{3}$</tex>receptor antagonist, with a metoclopramide-containing antiemetic cocktail in the prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis
Author
Faculty/Department
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Publication type
article
Publication
Philadelphia, Pa. ,
Subject
Human medicine
Source (journal)
Cancer: interdisciplinary international journal of the American Cancer Society. - Philadelphia, Pa.
Volume/pages
73(1994) :2 , p. 445-454
ISSN
0008-543X
1097-0142
ISI
A1994MR38100032
Carrier
E
Target language
English (eng)
Full text (Publishers DOI)
Affiliation
University of Antwerp
Abstract
Background. Chemotherapy-induced emesis is one of the most disturbing side effects in cancer therapy. Thus, antiemetic treatment is a mandatory adjunct in emetogenic chemotherapy. Methods. Tropisetron (Navoban, Sandoz Pharma Ltd., Basel, Switzerland), a new 5-HT3, receptor antagonist, was compared in a randomized multicenter trial with a high-dose metoclopramide-dexamethasone cocktail for the prevention of nausea and emesis during cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. Two hundred fifty-nine chemotherapy-naive patients were included and followed during two consecutive courses. The main cancer types were gynecologic tumors, followed by lung cancer, head and neck cancer, and bladder cancer. The cisplatin dose usually was in the range of 50-89 mg/m(2). The efficacy and quality of life assessments and the safety recordings were done during the first 6 days of both courses of chemotherapy. Results. Acute vomiting was prevented in 63-64% of patients by both antiemetic regimens. The total rate of control of vomiting increased from 63% on day 1 to 93% on day 6 in the group receiving tropisetron. Acute nausea was prevented in 40% of the patients with tropisetron monotherapy and in 61% of patients receiving the antiemetic cocktail. With regard to delayed nausea, there were no significant differences between the two antiemetic regimens. Mild headache and constipation were more frequently associated with tropisetron, and extrapyramidal side effects and sedation were associated with the antiemetic cocktail. Conclusions. Tropisetron was easier to administer and better tolerated than the cocktail, and it seems to be a highly efficacious and safe new antiemetic drug.
E-info
https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/iruaauth/cec71d/a044114.pdf
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:A1994MR38100032&DestLinkType=RelatedRecords&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:A1994MR38100032&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:A1994MR38100032&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
Handle