Japanese
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Cancer 1995-Dec

Randomized, double-blind comparison of a prochlorperazine-based versus a metoclopramide-based antiemetic regimen in patients undergoing autologous bone marrow transplantation.

登録ユーザーのみが記事を翻訳できます
ログインサインアップ
リンクがクリップボードに保存されます
C J Gilbert
K V Ohly
G Rosner
W P Peters

キーワード

概要

BACKGROUND

Highly emetogenic combination alkylator therapy is routinely used in autologous bone marrow transplantation for treatment of eligible patients with solid tumors. Antiemetic therapy remains less than optimal in this setting.

METHODS

One hundred twenty-six patients with cancer receiving high dose cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and carmustine with autologous bone marrow support were randomized to receive one of four double-blinded antiemetic regimens: 4-day continuous infusion prochlorperazine (6 mg/m2 intravenous [i.v.] loading dose followed by 1.5 mg/m2/hour) or metoclopramide (80 mg/m2 iv loading dose followed by 20 mg/m2/hr) each with either dronabinol 5 mg/m2 or placebo capsules for two doses before carmustine on the last day of chemotherapy. All subjects received scheduled lorazepam and diphenhydramine throughout the 4-day study period. Efficacy was measured by the Emetic Process Rating Scale and the Rhodes Index of Nausea and Vomiting (INV) Form 2.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients completed the study and were fully evaluable. The median number of emetic episodes on the metoclopramide study arm were: 1 (0-7, day -6), 1 (0-6, day -5), 2 (0-9, day -4), and 2 (0-10, with dronabinol day -3) or 2 (0-7, no dronabinol day -3) and on the prochlorperazine study arm were: 4 (0-12, day -6), 0 (0-8, day -5), 0 (0-12, day -4) and 2.5 (0-9, with dronabinol day -3) or 2 (0-12, no dronabinol day -3). Metoclopramide was significantly better on the first day of therapy (day -6, P < .002) and prochlorperazine was significantly better on the third day of therapy (day -4, P < 0.002). There was no significant difference among any of the four arms on the last day of chemotherapy (day -3), or when the median number of emetic episodes over the total study period were compared. The patients' assessment of nausea, vomiting, and retching on the INV Form 2 was consistent with the observer ratings. Toxicities requiring dose reduction or discontinuation of antiemetic drugs included diarrhea, cardiac arrhythmias, sedation, anxiety, and akathisia.

CONCLUSIONS

Both metoclopramide and prochlorperazine in combination with lorazepam and diphenhydramine offer good control of nausea and vomiting although the sedation and low risk for cardiac toxicity limit the regimen to an inpatient setting with close monitoring. No regimen was clearly superior during the entire treatment period but prochlorperazine offered more consistent control after the first day.

Facebookページに参加する

科学に裏打ちされた最も完全な薬草データベース

  • 55の言語で動作します
  • 科学に裏打ちされたハーブ療法
  • 画像によるハーブの認識
  • インタラクティブGPSマップ-場所にハーブをタグ付け(近日公開)
  • 検索に関連する科学出版物を読む
  • それらの効果によって薬草を検索する
  • あなたの興味を整理し、ニュース研究、臨床試験、特許について最新情報を入手してください

症状や病気を入力し、役立つ可能性のあるハーブについて読み、ハーブを入力して、それが使用されている病気や症状を確認します。
*すべての情報は公開された科学的研究に基づいています

Google Play badgeApp Store badge