Effectiveness and tolerance of Navoban (5HT3-receptor antagonist tropisetron) in prevention of cytostatic drug-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast carcinomas and gynecological malignancies

Efficacy and safety of the antiemetic agent Navoban (5HT3-receptor-antagonist Tropisetron) on cytostatic-induced emesis of breast cancers and gynecological cancers was tested in 28 female patients receiving a total of 127 chemotherapy courses containing high (cisplatin), moderate high (cyclophosphamid) or moderate (for example 5 FU) emetogenic cytostatic drugs. We studied antiemetic response rates of Navoban (5 mg/d) during the first 24 hours after administration of the chemotherapy as well as response rates of the "delayed nausea and emesis" (days 2-9 after chemotherapy). A complete response was observed in 103 chemotherapy courses (= 81.1%) during the first 24 hours after chemotherapy and in 93 courses (= 73.2%) for the "delayed emesis". Treatment failures (more than 5 vomiting episodes) during the first 24 hours were present in four courses and for the "delayed emesis" in 11 courses. The side effects of Navoban such as constipation, headache or tiredness were minimum. Therefore no patient refused to receive the necessary chemotherapy. Navoban is, with its single dose application, an effective therapeutic drug for the prevention of nausea and emesis in patients receiving a chemotherapy.     

Dolasetron. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic potential in the management of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery

Dolasetron (dolasetron mesilate) is a pseudopelletierine-derived 5-HT3 antagonist which has recently become available for clinical use. It is rapidly converted in vivo to its active major metabolite, hydrodolasetron, which appears to be largely responsible for its pharmacological activity. In clinical trials, single intravenous or oral doses of dolasetron were effective in preventing acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Intravenous doses of 1.8 mg/kg achieved complete suppression of vomiting in approximately 50% of patients receiving highly emetogenic cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and in approximately 60 to 80% of patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. In the latter setting, oral doses of 200 mg achieved similar response rates. In comparative studies, intravenous dolasetron 1.8 mg/kg was as effective as intravenous granisetron 3 mg or ondansetron 32 mg after highly emetogenic chemotherapy, and oral dolasetron 200 mg was equivalent to multiple oral doses of ondansetron (3 or 4 doses of 8 mg) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. Dolasetron 1.8 mg/kg was superior to metoclopramide in preventing emesis induced by high dose cisplatin or by moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in high risk subgroups. Dolasetron has also shown efficacy in preventing radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) in preliminary studies. Single intravenous or oral dolasetron doses ranging from 12.5 to 100 mg and 25 to 200 mg, respectively, were significantly more effective than placebo in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in female surgical patients. A 50 mg intravenous dose was as effective in preventing PONV as ondansetron 4 mg in a mixed-gender group. Intravenously administered dolasetron was also effective in treating established PONV, although complete suppression of vomiting was achieved in < 40% of patients. Dolasetron has a tolerability profile characteristic of this class of compounds, with headache, dizziness and diarrhoea being the most commonly occurring adverse events in clinical trials. Diarrhoea is not thought to be related to dolasetron administration, being experienced mostly by patients receiving chemotherapy. Dolasetron and other 5-HT3 receptor antagonists have been associated with minor changes in ECG intervals, but these generally do not appear to be clinically important. Thus, available evidence suggests that dolasetron will provide an alternative to other 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for the management of CINV and PONV. Further studies are required to determine whether it offers any advantages over other agents in these settings and to determine the optimum dosage for preventing RINV.     

Oral combination antiemetics in patients with small cell lung cancer receiving cisplatin or cyclophosphamide plus doxorubicin

BACKGROUND: Intravenous antiemetic combinations containing a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (like metoclopramide, ondansetron, or granisetron) with dexamethasone have become the standard therapy for the treatment of acute chemotherapy-induced vomiting. Intravenous antiemetics, however, can be more costly and take more time to prepare and deliver, and therefore are not preferred for home, outpatient, or office use. The objective of this study was to determine the antiemetic activity and safety of the oral combination antiemetic regimen of metoclopramide, dexamethasone, and diphenhydramine in patients with small cell lung cancer receiving standard outpatient chemotherapy programs. METHODS: Fifty-two patients receiving initial cisplatin (60 mg/m2) or cyclophosphamide (600-1500 mg/m2) plus doxorubicin (30-45 mg/m2) received an oral regimen of metoclopramide (3 mg/kg x 2 then 2 mg/kg x 2 or 4 doses), dexamethasone (20 mg) and diphenhydramine (50 mg x 2 or 3 doses) (oral MDD), beginning 30 minutes before chemotherapy. RESULTS: Vomiting was prevented in 15 of 21 (76%) patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 53%-92%) receiving cisplatin and 21 of 31 (71%) individuals (95% CI, 52%-86%) given cyclophosphamide plus doxorubicin. Adverse effects were mild and transient and included sedation, loose stools, akathisia, and hiccoughs. CONCLUSIONS: The oral MDD antiemetic regimen prevented acute emesis in 73% of the patients entered and was well tolerated in this population of patients with small cell lung cancer.     

Effective measures against side effects by increasing ACNU dose for malignant glioma: effects on digestive organs

Loading therapy consisting of the ACNU regimen was instituted as postoperative anticancer chemotherapy for malignant gliomas. The efficacy rate of the regimen was 25% at a dose of 3 mg/kg. A high incidence of hematological changes, such as leukopenia (neutropenia) and thrombocytopenia, were observed after chemotherapy. The former could be prevented by the administration of G-CSF, but platelet infusions were necessary in some patients for amelioration of thrombocytopenia. Gastroenterological symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting, were also frequently noted. Granisetron (Kytril), which is a recently developed selective competitive inhibitor of the 5-HT3 receptor, was used for the treatment of these adverse effects, and was found to be clinically effective.     

Antiemetic efficacy of granisetron in pediatric cancer treatment--(2). Comparison of granisetron and granisetron plus methylprednisolone as antiemetic prophylaxis

A crossover clinical trial was carried out to compare the effectiveness and safety of granisetron alone (40 micrograms/kg) with that from a combination of granisetron plus methylprednisolone (MPL, 10 mg/kg) for control of emesis and vomiting induced by anticancer drugs in children with cancer. Complete control of emesis and vomiting were achieved in 95% (19/20 cases) of patients receiving the combination compared to 85% (17/20 cases) of patients receiving granisetron alone. There were no clinical toxicities or side effects in either treatment group. These data indicated that the combination of granisetron plus MPL was superior for control of emesis and vomiting in children receiving cytostatic anticancer drugs.     

Tropisetron in the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting over six courses of emetogenic chemotherapy

Tropisetron (Navoban") suppresses nausea and vomiting induced by cancer chemotherapy by antagonizing central and peripheral 5-HT3 receptors. In this open-label study, tropisetron was evaluated in 873 patients who were either refractory to antiemetic treatment during previous chemotherapy or at high risk of emesis as a result of current chemotherapy. The most commonly used agents alone or in combination were cyclophosphamide (35%), fluorouracil (30%), carboplatin (24%) and cisplatin (21%). The primary tumors were breast cancer (27%), lung cancer (16%), gynecological cancers (12%) and lymphoma (9%). Tropisetron was administered as a 15 min infusion prior to chemotherapy and an additional oral 5 mg dose was taken by 80% of the patients on subsequent days. During course 1, complete response to tropisetron was obtained in 64% of patients on day 1, 54% on day 2, 63% on day 3, 71% on day 4 and 77% on day 5. Very similar response rates were found for the six chemotherapy courses. There were few failures after complete and partial response, at maximum 3 and 15%, respectively. Moreover, 24-38% of those with partial response and 7-29% of those with failure could achieve a complete response during the following cycle. The treatment was well tolerated, the most frequently reported adverse events being constipation (3.7%) and headache (2.6%).     

Use of Navoban in pediatric oncology

In the course of treatment for tumors and recurrences, 86 children, aged 4-16 years, received polychemotherapy which induced excessive vomiting. Navoban (tropisetron) was administered to control vomiting. Total or partial control of nausea and vomiting was observed in 94.1%. No side-effects were registered.     

Control of emesis by intravenous granisetron in breast cancer patients treated with 5-FU, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide

Granisetron, a potent and selective 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor (5-HT3) antagonist was reported to be an effective antiemetic agent both in animal studies and in patients given highly emetogenic chemotherapy. A sample of 43 patients with breast cancer was accrued from September to November 1992 in a phase II study to assess the efficacy of granisetron in patients receiving FEC (5-FU, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide). Each patient received 3 mg intravenous granisetron as a single dose just prior to chemotherapy. Oral metoclopromide was prescribed to each patient as a rescue anti-emetic. The emetic episodes and degree of nausea were evaluated on a daily basis. Good control of emesis (0-2 episodes of vomiting) and nausea (mild or no nausea) was in the range 77%-98% and 77%-93% respectively. There was a complete response (no emetic episodes throughout the 6-day period) in 16 patients (37.2%). Onset of emesis tends to occur on day 1 and tend to subside after day 3; 85% of patients had onset of emesis in the first 2 days after chemotherapy. Control of emesis and nausea tends to improve after day 3, which could be the result of the reduced emetogenicity of the combination FEC with time. Altogether, 77% had good control of acute emesis; control of delayed emesis was better with 84% achieving a major response on day 2 after chemotherapy, which improved to more than 90% after day 4. Granisetron was generally tolerated with headache being the most common side-effect followed by constipation and flushing. This study suggests that granisetron is an effective and well-tolerated anti-emetic agent, which deserves randomised trials to elucidate its efficacy further.     

Treatment of cisplatin-related nausea and vomiting with a combination of ondansetron and metoclopramide: a pilot study

Forty chemotherapy-naive patients receiving high-dose cisplatin were included in a pilot study of a combination of ondansetron plus metoclopramide as antiemetic therapy. Patients received ondansetron 16 mg plus metoclopramide 0.5 mg/kg in 250 cm3 of normal saline i.v. 15 min before cisplatin administration on day 1; then ondansetron 8 mg was given orally b.i.d. and metoclopramide 0.5 mg/kg was given intramuscularly t.i.d. for 4 days. This combination was given to all patients receiving the first cycle of chemotherapy. At the second cycle of chemotherapy all patients received the same antiemetic treatment as above plus methylprednisolone 125 mg i.v. on day 1 and the intramuscularly once a day for 4 days. There were 20 females and 20 males with a mean performance status of 1 (range 0-2) and a mean age of 58 years (range 36-68). Ten patients had ovarian carcinoma, eight patients had uterine adenocarcinoma and 22 and non-small cell lung carcinoma. The mean cisplatin dose was 96 mg/m2. All patients denied significant alcohol consumption. At cycle 1, complete protection against acute emesis was achieved in 22 patients (55%), major protection in 12 cases (30%), minor protection in four patients (10%) and failure in two cases (5%). On the other hand, the efficacy of this combination on delayed vomiting was not striking. For delayed vomiting, complete protection was observed in nine patients (23%), major protection in 13 cases (33%), minor protection in 10 patients (25%) and failure in eight cases (20%). At cycle 2, patients also received methylprednisolone showing complete protection from vomiting in 19 cases (47%) and major protection on 12 cases (30%). Results achieved with ondansetron plus metoclopramide are in the range reported for ondansetron alone in the medical literature. Although this study was not prospectively carried out in a randomized fashion, the results are not suggestive of a possible positive effect of metoclopramide addition to ondansetron. On the other hand, these results stress the role that corticosteroids may play in the control of delayed emesis. Toxicity was predictable and the frequency of side-effects was in the range reported in other studies with ondansetron.     

A lymphoma cell line resistant to 4-piperidinopiperidine was less sensitive to CPT-11

The purpose of the study was to assess the toxicity and efficacy of an oral, combination antiemetic regimen including granisetron (Kytril; SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals, Philadelphia, PA, USA) in the setting of highly emetogenic conditioning chemotherapy for stem cell transplantation. Antiemetic prophylaxis consisted of oral granisetron 2 mg once daily, oral prochlorperazine 10 mg q 6 h and oral dexamethasone 4 mg q 6 h, beginning 1 h prior to chemotherapy on each of the 4 days of chemotherapy and continuing until 24 h after the completion of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC). Patients received either CVP (cyclophosphamide 6 g/m2, VP-16 1800 mg/m2 and carboplatin 1200 mg/m2) or CTP (thiotepa 500 mg/m2 in place of VP-16) in four daily doses given over 4 h from days -4 to -1. Previously mobilized and cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) were reinfused on day +1. Evaluation of nausea, emetic episodes (EE), adverse events, and rescue medications were recorded on a daily patient diary. Thirty-six patients were entered. Fifty-three percent (95% CI = 37-75%) of patients achieved complete response for emesis (CR = 0 EE/24 h) and 75% (95% CI = 58-90%) had combined complete and major response (CR+MR = 0-3 EE/24 h) during all 5 of the treatment days. During the 5 study days, the average number of patient-days with no emesis was 3.7 (74%) and with 1-3 EE was 4.3 (86%). On days -4, -3, -2, -1 and 0, the combined CR+MR rate for emesis was 97, 92, 86, 78 and 75%, respectively. Nausea was absent or mild on all 5 study days in 57% (95% CI = 37-75%). Eight patients had severe late-onset emesis occurring on days +1 to +3 after reinfusion of stem cells. No clinically significant toxicities attributable to the antiemetic regimen were observed. An all oral antiemetic regimen of granisetron, prochlorperazine and dexamethasone appears to be safe and highly effective in patients receiving multiple, daily, high-dose chemotherapy regimens. This regimen offers the advantage of cost-savings, a low side-effect profile and ease of administration in the predominately outpatient setting of HDC with peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT).     

Sequential transurethral surgery, multiple drug chemotherapy and radiation therapy for invasive bladder carcinoma: initial report

Forty-seven patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (T2-T4, Nx, M0) were treated by transurethral resection, followed by 3-4 cycles of combination chemotherapy (methotrexate 30 mg/m2 on days 1, 14; cis-platinum 100 mg/m2 on day 2; vinblastine 3 mg/m2 on days 1, 14; repeated every 21 days), and external beam irradiation (64-66 Gy to the bladder and 40 Gy to the pelvic lymphatics). Complete remission after trans urethral resection and chemotherapy was achieved in 24 out of 45 patients (53%). Cystectomy was performed in patients without complete response to transurethral resection and chemotherapy. The therapy was completed as planned in 45/47 patients. After transurethral resection, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, biopsy proven complete response was achieved in 62% (28/45); Stage T2T3 in 67% (23/34), Stage T4 in 45% (5/11) of patients. Among 19 patients with positive biopsy findings after transurethral resection and chemotherapy, 14 underwent cystectomy. After follow-up of 4-55 months (median 23 months) 75% (34/45) are alive, 68% (31/45) have had their bladders preserved, and 53% (24/45) are free of the primary tumor. The actuarial survival of all 45 patients is 73%. Moderate nausea and vomiting during treatment were common; severe leukopenia and mucositis were observed in five patients. Late side effects such as miction disorders and diarrhea were predominantly mild. Although the observation period has been too short to allow a definitive evaluation of treatment results, we feel both from the point of bladder preservation and disease-free survival that the presented treatment approach is successful in a majority of T2T3 patients, whereas a large tumor size (T4) renders this treatment less effective.     

Use of oral and intravenous ondansetron in patients treated with cisplatin

Ondansetron, a selective 5-HT3 antagonist, has been shown to be effective in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. From July and August 1991, 25 patients were accrued in a phase II study to assess the efficacy of ondansetron in patients receiving cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. Patients received intravenous cisplatin 100 mg/m2, given either as a 24-hour infusion on day 1 or in divided doses as eight-hour infusions daily on days 1 to 3. Each patient received 24 mg of ondansetron per day for six days. Intravenous dexamethasone 24 mg was given daily on the days of cisplatin infusion. The emetic episodes and degree of nausea were evaluated daily. "Good" control of emesis (0-2 episodes of vomiting) and nausea (mild or no nausea) ranged from 64-100% and 88-100% respectively. Failure in emesis control occurred most frequently on days 3 and 4. Ondansetron was generally well tolerated with only minimal side-effects. One patient developed unexplained encephalopathy which resolved completely. Our results suggest that ondansetron is an effective anti-emetic agent with minimal toxicities. Randomised studies comparing ondansetron against "standard" anti-emetics should be conducted.     

Computer simulation of changes in nursing productivity from early tracheal extubation of coronary artery bypass graft patients

A total of 530 patients were treated in this multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study to compare the anti-emetic efficacy and safety of a once daily ondansetron oral regimen with a once daily i.v. dosing regimen over a 24 h period, administered to patients prior to receiving cisplatin (50 mg/m2 or greater) chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive a single dose of ondansetron plus dexamethasone given either orally (ondansetron 24 mg and dexamethasone 12 mg, n=262) or i.v. (ondansetron 8 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg, n=268). Complete control of emesis (i.e. no emetic episodes, no rescue and no premature withdrawal) was achieved for 85% of patients (224 of 262) in the oral group and 83% (223 of 268) in the i.v. group. No nausea was reported in 70% of patients in the oral group and 68% in the i.v. group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for any of the assessments of efficacy, which included time to first emetic episode, number of emetic episodes and the worst grade of nausea occurring over the 24 h study period. Once daily ondansetron oral and i.v., in combination with dexamethasone, was well tolerated in this study. In conclusion, once daily oral ondansetron 24 mg plus dexamethasone is equally effective in the control of emesis and nausea induced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy as once daily ondansetron 8 mg i.v. plus dexamethasone.     

Early neuropsychological impairment in HIV-seropositive intravenous drug users: evidence from the Italian Multicentre Neuropsychological HIV Study

The purpose of this study was to document the emetogenic potential of intrathecal chemotherapy (IC) in children and to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in reducing nausea and vomiting with this chemotherapy treatment. Patients less than 18 years of age with acute lymphoblastic leukemia were eligible to participate in a survey project measuring the emetogenic potential of various chemotherapy treatments. Patients surveyed for 1 or more IC treatments were included in this report. The IC consisted of methotrexate, hydrocortisone and cytarabine, dosed according to patient age. A nausea/vomiting survey instrument was completed by each patient and/or parent following IC treatment. The instrument rated nausea, vomiting and daily activity interference (DAI) on a 4-point scale of 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate and 3 = severe, and collected data on the number of vomiting and/or retching episodes in addition to the child's appetite following the chemotherapy treatment. When ondansetron was employed, it was administered in an i.v. infusion at a dose of 0.15 mg/kg before and after chemotherapy or as an oral dose of 4 mg or 8 mg before chemotherapy. Courses of IC without antiemetics were analyzed to determine the emetogenic potential of IC. For patients receiving IC both with and without ondansetron, courses were compared with each patient used as their own control to determine the influence of ondansetron upon survey responses. Statistical analysis consisted of nonparametric Friedman 2-way ANOVA for ordinal variables and a paired t-test for continuous variables. The binomial test was employed to analyze for differences between ondansetron and no antiemetic in the number of patients with complete control of both nausea and vomiting or vomiting alone. A total of 63 children with a mean age of 7.6 +/- 4.2 years were each studied on one or more occasions. Thirty-seven children were surveyed for 87 IC treatments without antiemetics (group I), and 17 children from this group were surveyed for 48 IC courses with i.v. ondansetron (group IA). An additional 18 children were subsequently surveyed for 39 IC courses with i.v. ondansetron (group II). Fifteen patients (7 of whom were members of group I) were surveyed following 33 IC courses with oral ondansetron (group III). The survey scores for group I patients were: nausea severity 1.3 +/- 1.1, vomiting severity 1.2 +/- 1.1, DAI 1.2 +/- 1.0 and mean number of emetic episodes 4.7 +/- 8.4. The mean appetite score was 1.5 +/- 1.1. For patients in group IA, nausea severity (0.8 +/- 0.9), vomiting severity (0.5 +/- 0.8), DAI (0.7 +/- 0.8), and the number of emetic episodes (1.4 +/- 2.8) were all significantly lower than with prior IC treatments without ondansetron. For complete protection, children receiving i.v. ondansetron had greater complete protection rates from both nausea and vomiting or vomiting alone than did patients receiving no antiemetic. Survey responses were also lower for patients receiving oral ondansetron, but insufficient control data did not allow for statistical analysis. IC results in mild to moderate nausea and vomiting in children. The emetogenic potential of IC is significantly reduced by i.v. ondansetron.     

Comparative study on quality of life between weekly and monthly chemotherapy with cisplatin, vindesine and mitomycin C in patients with non-small cell lung cancer

A comparative study between weekly and monthly chemotherapy with CDDP, VDS and MMC was performed on the basis of QOL in patients (stage III A/III B/IV) with non-small lung cancer from September 1993 to August 1996. Arm A received CDDP (80 mg/m2) monthly on day 1, VDS (3 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8, MMC (8 mg/m2) on day 1. Arm B received CDDP (40 mg/m2), VDS (3 mg/m2) and MMC (4 mg/m2) on day 1, and followed by CDDP (20 mg/m2), VDS (1.5 mg/m2) and MMC (2 mg/m2) weekly. A diary-type QOL self-rating questionnaire was devised for this study, consisting of 5 scales including 13-item questionnaires and a face scale as the global scale. Chronological QOL data from 20 days during chemotherapy (total dose of CDDP was 80 mg/m2 in both A and B arm) were analyzed using summary measures. In the 78 eligible subjects of the study, 34 were QOL subjects of the 27 eligible subjects, 13 were in arm A and 14 in arm B. 1. The questionnaire was confirmed to be satisfactory with regard to reliability and validity as a questionnaire for the evaluation of this study by factor and correlation analysis. 2. Although each scale changed to the worth level after chemotherapy, there was no significant difference between arm A and B. 3. Summary statistics were assessed using indices of the area under the curve (AUC) and the maximum fluctuations of QOL scores (Dif max) arm B showed a tendency to smaller changes than arm A in AUC and Dif max. There was a significant difference in the physical well-being scale of Dif max. 4. Three items, including the physical well-being in arm B, revealed a better score than those of arm A. Abdominal condition showed a significant difference between the two arms. 5. No obvious difference in anti-cancer effectiveness was found between arm A and B. Arm B showed a longer median survival, less nausea and vomiting, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia compared with arm A. The above results suggested that weekly chemotherapy is as effective, less toxic and shows less influence against patients QOL than the conventional monthly chemotherapy in this study.     

Preliminary report of the Asian-Oceanian Clinical Oncology Association randomized trial comparing cisplatin and epirubicin followed by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in the treatment of patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Asian-Oceanian Clinical Oncology Association Nasopharynx Cancer Study Group

BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial was to compare the outcome achieved with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy to that achieved with radiotherapy alone for patients with locoregionally advanced undifferentiated or poorly differentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) meeting one of the following criteria: Ho's T3 disease, Ho's N2-N3 disease, or lymph node size > or =3 cm. METHODS: Between September 1989 and August 1993, 334 patients were enrolled in the study, with equal numbers of patients randomized to the neoadjuvant chemotherapy arm (CT arm) and the radiotherapy arm (RT arm). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of 2-3 cycles of cisplatin (60 mg/m2 on Day 1) and epirubicin (110 mg/m2 on Day 1) followed by radiotherapy was given to the CT arm. For radiotherapy, a dose of 66-74 gray (Gy) (median, 71 Gy) was delivered to the primary tumor and 60-76 Gy (median, 66 Gy) to the neck. Two hundred eighty-six eligible patients completed the treatment and were evaluable for treatment response (134 in the CT arm, 152 in the RT arm). All patients were included in the survival analysis based on the intention to treat. The median follow-up was 30 months for the whole cohort and 41 months for the surviving patients. RESULTS: Analysis of the 334 patients based on the intention to treat showed no significant difference in relapse free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS) between the 2 treatment arms (3-year RFS rate: 48% in the CT arm vs. 42% in the RT arm, P = 0.45; 3-year OS rate: 78% vs. 71%, P = 0.57). In an efficacy analysis based on only the 286 evaluable patients, a trend of improved RFS favoring the CT arm was observed (3-year RFS rate: 58% vs. 46%, P = 0.053), with again no significant difference in OS (3-year OS rate: 80% vs. 72%, P = 0.21). In the subgroup of 49 patients with bulky neck lymph nodes >6 cm, improved RFS (3-year RFS rate: 63% vs. 28%, P = 0.026) and OS (3-year OS rate: 73% vs. 37%, P = 0.057) were observed, favoring the CT arm. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter randomized study did not demonstrate any benefit with the addition of cisplatin-epirubicin neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma; therefore routine administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to this target group cannot be recommended. Although the overall incidence of recurrence was reduced with the addition of chemotherapy in the efficacy analysis, the overall survival was not affected. A more effective chemotherapy regimen, the selection of an appropriate target group, and the use of an alternative strategy for combining chemoradiotherapy should be explored in future trials.     

Antifungal prophylaxis with itraconazole in neutropenic patients with acute leukaemia

The efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis with itraconazole capsules and its serum concentrations were evaluated in patients intensively treated for acute leukaemia. A consecutive group of patients without systemic antifungal prophylaxis (January 1993 to August 1994, period 1) was compared with another consecutive group of patients (period 2) who received itraconazole capsules (September 1994 to April 1995 400 mg/day, from May 1995 onwards 600 mg/day). All patients admitted with acute leukaemia and standard or high-dose chemotherapy were included into the study. Clinical endpoint was mortality from proven fungal infection. Seventy-six patients and 148 courses of cytotoxic chemotherapy were analysed in the control group as well as 47 patients and 112 treatment courses in the intervention group. Antifungal prophylaxis led to a significant decrease of mortality from invasive fungal infections (8.8%-0.9%, P = 0.005). The median trough concentration of itraconazole of all measurements was 520 ng/ml (range 230-793) in patients who received 400 mg/day and 760 ng/ml (370-1200) in patients receiving a dosage of 600 mg/day (P = 0.002). These findings suggest that itraconazole is an effective drug for antifungal prophylaxis but also that a considerable number of patients do not reach the desired trough levels (>500 ng/ml) with itraconazole capsules.     

Generating a normalized geometric liver model using warping

This review discusses the development and use of 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) antagonists, especially granisetron, for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced emesis. Following recent evidence suggesting that high-dose chemotherapy is more effective in increasing tumor response rate and median survival time, more effective antiemetic control is essential. Granisetron, a new 5-HT3, is approximately 400 times more potent than metoclopramide and, unlike metoclopramide, does not produce extrapyramidal side effects. Granisetron has been shown to be effective as a single prophylactic dose, over 5 days and in patients receiving repeated cycles of chemotherapy. Patients with nausea and vomiting within the first 24 h after chemotherapy are more likely to experience delayed symptoms; however, episodes of breakthrough nausea and vomiting can be controlled by intervention with one, and in some cases more, doses of granisetron. The development of granisetron represents an important advance in the control of chemotherapy induced emesis.     

Effect of concurrent use of ondansetron hydrochloride and dexamethasone against nausea and vomiting in lung cancer patients receiving cisplatin

We examined the efficacy of concurrent use of ondansetron hydrochloride and dexamethasone, and the effective dose of dexamethasone against nausea and vomiting in lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy including single high dose cisplatin. The study was carried out on total of 44 courses of chemotherapy in either initial onset or recurrence of lung cancer. The patients were given 4 mg of ondansetron injection on the day of cisplatin injection (Day 1), and 4 mg/day of ondansetron tablet for Days 2 to 4. These patients were randomly allocated into 2 groups, i.e., those who, on Day 2, concomitantly received 10 mg of dexamethasone (D10 Group, 22 courses) or 20 mg (D20 Group, 22 courses), for comparing the antiemetic effects in a different concomitant dose of dexamethasone. An efficacy rate of 70% or more was achieved in each group for acute emesis on Day 1. The efficacy rate was 80% or above for emesis on Day 2 when dexamethasone was concurrently administered, and Days 3 and 4 in both groups. No significant difference was observed between the groups. A higher complete suppression rate against nausea was seen in D20 Group even though the difference from D10 Group was not significant. Furthermore, food intake rate on Day 2 was significantly better in D20 Group. However, in the cases that were graded effective or markedly effective for acute emesis on Day 1, the efficacy rate was also high in both groups through Days 2-4. It was notable that the efficacy rate of Days 2-4 was 100% in D2 Group. The high efficacy rate was shown in male patients regardless of which dose of dexamethasone was used. However, control of emesis was unfavorable in female patients on Day 1 and was still unfavorable even though dexamethasone was combined from Day 2. We considered from the above results that 10 mg/day of concurrent dexamethasone is sufficient in suppression of delayed emesis on Day 2. However, in order to improve nausea or food intake, or to suppress emesis in patients who are highly likely to show unfavorable control for Day 2 and onward, 20 mg/day should also be effective.     

Corticosteroids significantly delay the onset of docetaxel-induced fluid retention: final results of a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: To confirm the efficacy of docetaxel in patients with breast cancer previously treated with one chemotherapy regimen for advanced or metastatic disease and to compare the incidence of fluid retention (FR) and skin toxicity when docetaxel is administered with and without prophylactic corticosteroids. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-three patients, pretreated with one chemotherapy regimen for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with bidimensionally measurable and progressive disease, were eligible for this randomized trial. Docetaxel with prophylactic oral antihistamine was administered at a dose of 50 mg/m2 as a 1-hour infusion on days 1 and 8 every 21 days and patients were randomized to receive methylprednisolone (40 mg days -1, 0, 1, 7, 8, and 9 of each cycle) (arm A) or no methylprednisolone (arm B). RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (34%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 23% to 45%) achieved on objective response. The median time to disease progression and median overall survival time were 5 and 13.5 months, respectively. In total, 415 cycles of docetaxel were administered (arm A: N = 219, median = six; arm B: N = 196, median = five). The most common toxicity observed was grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, which occurred in 79% of patients. Clinically significant nonhematologic side effects included skin reactions and asthenia. In an intent-to-treat analysis, patients who received methylprednisolone premedication had a delayed onset of FR (median time to onset of FR: arm A, 84 days; arm B, 62 days; P = .01) and received a higher median cumulative dose of docetaxel before the onset of FR (arm A, 333 mg/m2; arm B, 215 mg/m2; P = .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of skin toxicity between the two arms. CONCLUSION: Docetaxel, at this dose and schedule, has definite antitumor activity in pretreated MBC patients. Moreover, this is the first randomized trial to show that corticosteroids have a favorable impact on docetaxel-induced FR.