These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Efficacy of ondansentron treatment for acute emesis with different dosing schedules 8 vs 32 mg. A randomized study.
    Author: Tsavaris N, Kosmas CH, Vadiaka M, Kontos A, Katsorida M, Dimitrakopoulos A, Zerai A, Koufos CH.
    Journal: J Exp Clin Cancer Res; 2001 Mar; 20(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 11370826.
    Abstract:
    The aim of the present randomized study was to evaluate which dose of Ondansentron (OND)(32 versus 8 mg) is appropriate for the antiemetic treatment of a uniform group of patients (pts) with Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) who were treated with Cisplatin (CDDP) 100 mg/m2 in combination with other less emetogenic drugs. One hundred and ten patients, with histologically confirmed NSCLC entered this randomized study. They were between 50 - 70 years old, with no previous Chemotherapy, with a PS (Karnofsky) >60%. They were randomized into two groups; Group A: OND as a 32 mg dose the first 24 hours, followed by 8 mg every 8 hrs for the following four days, combined with dexamethasone, 8 mg i.v. the first day, and 8 mg p.o., in the morning, the following three days. Group B: OND as a 8 mg dose every day for 4 days, combined with dexamethasone 8 mg i.v. and 8 mg p.o. the following three days. In this randomized study, of the 110 patients who entered, 106 were evaluable. Clinical parameters were similar between the examined groups. A higher number of patients of Group A presented complete response (P 0.0001), compared to patients of Group B who failed (P 0.004), during the first 24 hours. In the 3 days that followed, a higher number of pts of Group A presented complete response to the antiemetic therapy (P 0.001, P 0.0001), while Group B failed (P 0.007, P 0.001, P 0.019), or presented minor response (P 0.0001, P 0.004). Patients who had no antiemetic response needed additional therapy and were excluded from the evaluatio (13 pts of Group B). Retches (P 0.0001, P 0.005), and nausea (P 0.0001, P were also frequent in Group B. We concluded that reduced OND doses (8 mg) are inadequate in the prevention of emesis after high dose CDDP (100 mg/m2) and should be avoided.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]