scholarly journals Antiemetic treatment in cancer patients

Onkologie ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 242-246
Author(s):  
Petra Holečková ◽  
Jana Gregorová
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Antiemetic Treatment

Evaluation of the Antiemetic Activity of Bromopride in Cancer Patients Treated with I.V. CMF

1985 ◽  
Vol 71 (5) ◽  
pp. 455-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Roila ◽  
Vincenzo Minotti ◽  
Enzo Ballatori ◽  
Carlo Basurto ◽  
Maurizio Tonato
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Protective Effect ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Antiemetic Treatment ◽  
Antiemetic Drugs ◽  
Antiemetic Activity ◽  
Positive Lymph Nodes

In more than 70 % of patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer with histologically positive lymph nodes, precautional therapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) causes nausea and vomiting. At the present time, the optimal antiemetic therapy has not been found. From May 1983 to March 1984, 35 patients, of whom 34 were evaluable, were entered in a randomized double blind antiemetic treatment with either bromopride (16 patients), a procainamide derivative structurally similar to metoclopramide, or placebo (18 patients). Bromopride (20 mg) and the placebo were administered in a 3-min i.v. injection half an hour before chemotherapy and at 3 ½ and 7 ½ following chemotherapy. A complete antiemetic protection was obtained in 9 patients (56.3 %) treated with bromopride compared to 5 patients (27.8 %) treated with the placebo. A major antiemetic (≤ 2 vomiting episodes) was obtained in 3 patients (18.7 %) treated with bromopride compared to 5 patients (27.8 %) treated with the placebo. Statistical analysis showed a trend in favor of bromopride (P = 0.058). The most frequent side effect was sedation reported in 6 patients (37.5 %) treated with bromopride and 2 patients (11.1 %) treated with the placebo (P = 0.06). The study was interrupted when several patients presented vomiting episodes more than 12 h after CMF administration, and thus beyond the foreseeable protective effect of the antiemetic treatment. It is our opinion that the search for an optimal antiemetic regimen in the course of i.v. CMF therapy should consider the administration of antiemetic drugs at least until 12 h after chemotherapy.

Variations in the 5-Hydroxytryptamine Type 3B Receptor Gene as Predictors of the Efficacy of Antiemetic Treatment in Cancer Patients

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 2147-2155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Benoit Tremblay ◽  
Rolf Kaiser ◽  
Orhan Sezer ◽  
Nadja Rösler ◽  
Claudia Schelenz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Specific Binding ◽  
Receptor Gene ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Receptor Antagonists ◽  
Deletion Variant ◽  
Visual Analog Scales ◽  
Antiemetic Treatment ◽  
Flanking Region ◽  
Type 3

Purpose: Serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 [5-HT3]) receptor antagonists have substantially reduced but not eliminated nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy. They act through specific binding to the 5-HT3A, 5-HT3Breceptor complex. The 5-HT3Bsubunit seems to be most important for its functionality. We hypothesized that patients with genetic variations in the 5-HT3Breceptor gene might respond differently to antiemetic treatment.Patients and Methods: We included 242 cancer patients on their first day of chemotherapy. Nausea and vomiting were documented before and twice during the chemotherapy using standardized interviews and visual analog scales. We sequenced the entire 5-HT3Breceptor gene, including the 5` flanking region and at least a 20–base pair intronic sequence of each intron-exon splice site of all patients.Results: Approximately 30% of all patients suffered from nausea or vomiting. Sequencing of the 5-HT3Breceptor gene revealed 13 polymorphisms: two of them were amino acid exchanges (Tyr129Ser, Ala223Thr) and two were deletion variants. In both observation periods, patients homozygous for the −100_−102delAAG deletion variant of the promotor region experienced vomiting more frequently than did all the other patients.Conclusion: A more efficient antiemetic treatment with 5-HT3receptor antagonists might be possible on a pharmacogenetic basis. However, only a small fraction of the therapeutic failure is explained by the −AAG deletion variant of the 5-HT3Breceptor gene. Additional clinical and biochemical studies are needed to confirm the association.

scholarly journals GRP-038 Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Breast Cancer Patients: Effectiveness and Safety of Antiemetic Treatment

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A14.1-A14
Author(s):  
E Domingo Chiva ◽  
MJ De Mora Alfaro ◽  
E García Martínez ◽  
MR Garrigues Sebastiá ◽  
C García Gómez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Antiemetic Treatment

On-demand antiemetic treatment with the serotonine antagonist tropisetron in cisplatin-treated cancer patients

1994 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 410-418
Author(s):  
H Havsteen ◽  
L J Andersen ◽  
M Kjaer ◽  
M Dalmark
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Antiemetic Treatment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document