Skip to main content
Log in

Randomized crossover antiemetic study in cisplatin-treated patients

Comparison between high-dose IV metoclorpramide and high-dose IV dexamethasone

  • Original Articles
  • Antiemetic Trial, Dexamethasone vs. Metoclopramide
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

This prospective, randomized, nonblind study comparing the antiemetic effectiveness of high-dose IV metoclopramide and high-dose IV dexamthasone was performed in 78 advanced cancer patients. Chemotherapeutic treatment consisted in cisplatin at a high-dose (120 mg/m2) (HD-CDDP) and at a low-dose (LD-CDDP), either alone (60 mg/m2) or in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents (50 mg/m2). The evaluation of the effectiveness of antiemetic therapy was based on three parameters: prevention of vomiting (“major protection”), number of emetic episodes, and subjective preference. Out of 78 study patients, 67 were evaluable. Overall, metoclopramide proved to be statistically superior to dexamethasone in preventing vomiting (P<0.005), in reducing the median/mean number of emetic episodes (P<0.001/0.001), and in subjective preference (P<0.01). The results divided between HD-CDDP and LD-CDDP groups were also in favor of metoclopramide for reduction of the median/mean number of emetic episodes (P<0.001/0.001 for the HD-CDDP group and P<0.001/0.005 for the LD-CDDP group) and in subjective preference (P<0.001 and P<0.001 for the HD- and LD-CDDP groups, respectively). No statistical differences were noted when LD-CDDP was used in monochemotherapy, whereas when LD-CDDP was used in combination chemotherapy, statistical differences in favor of metoclopramide were noted again for the median/mean number of emetic episodes (P<0.01/0.05) and for subjective preference (P<0.01), even though the effectiveness of both antiemetic agents was greatly reduced. The evaluation of previously untreated patients reflected the overall results: for the HD-CDDP group all three parameters demonstrated statistical significance in favor of metoclopramide; for the LD-CDDP group, of all three parameters, prevention of vomiting (major protection) was the only one for which there was no significant difference.

Mild sedation was the only side effect of metoclopramide. No extrapyramidal reactions were noted during this trial, but concomitant orphenadrine treatment was given. Dexamethasone was always well tolerated. In conclusion, high-dose IV metoclopramide demonstrated its superiority over high-dose IV dexamethasone in all subsets of our population except the LD-CDDP monochemotherapy group, in which the two antiemetics were found to be equivalent in effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aapro MS, Alberts DS (1981) High-dose dexamethasone for prevention of cisplatin-induced vomiting. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 7:11–14

    Google Scholar 

  2. Armitage P (1971) Statistical methods in medical research. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bruera E, Roca E, Cedaro L et al (1982) An evaluation of metoclopramide (MCP) and dexamethasone (DM) in the prevention of chemotherapy (CT)-induced emesis. Proc AACR/ASCO 23:55

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bui NB, Marit G, Albin H, et al (1982) Metoclopramide à forte dose au cour de chimiothérapies anticancéreuses lourdes. Etude de phase II chez 80 malades consecutifs. Bull Cancer (Paris) 69:330–335

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buston JL (1981) Methylprednisolone as an antiemetic. N Engl J Med 304:486

    Google Scholar 

  6. Drapkin RL, Sokol GH, Paladine WJ et al (1982) The antiemetic effect and dose response of dexamethasone in patients receiving cis-platinum Proc AACR/ASCO 23:61

    Google Scholar 

  7. Frustaci S, Tirelli U, Tumolo S, et al (1983) High-dose metoclopramide in Cisplatin-treated patients. Chemioterapia II:75–77

    Google Scholar 

  8. Frytac S, Moertel CG (1981) Management of nausea and vomiting in the Cancer patient. JAMA 245:393–396

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gralla RJ, Itri LM, Pisko SE, et al (1981) Antiemetic efficacy of high-dose metochlopramide: randomized trials with placebo and chlorperazine in patients with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. N Engl J Med 35:905–909

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gralla RJ, Tyson LB, Clark RA, et al (1982) Antiemetic trials with high-dose metoclopramide: superiority over THC, and preservation of efficacy in subsequent chemotherapy courses. Proc AACR/ASCO 23:58

    Google Scholar 

  11. Herman TS, Einhorn LH, Jones SE, et al (1979) Superiority of nabilone over prochlorperazine as an antiemetic in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 300:1295–1297

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lazlo J, Hanson DC, Lucas VS, Clark R, Tyson L, Gralla R, Derivan A (1983) Lorezepan as an antiemetic against cisplatin. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2:95

    Google Scholar 

  13. Long A, Mioduszewski J, Natale R (1982) A randomized double-blind cross-over comparison of the antiemetic activity of levonantradol and prochlorperazine. Proc AACR/ASCO 23:57

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mason BA, Dambra J, Grossman B et al (1982) Effective control of Cis-platin-induced nausea using high-dose steroids and droperidol. Cancer Treat Rep 66:243–245

    Google Scholar 

  15. Meyer M, Long AM, Natale RB, Koller C, Mioduszewski J (1983) Phase I, II and III trials of new antiemetic agentlorazepam. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2:88

    Google Scholar 

  16. Prestayko AW, D'Aoust JC, Issel BF, et al (1979) Cisplatin (cisdiamminedicloroplatinum) (II). Cancer Treat Rev 6:17–39

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rich WM, Abdulhayogen G, Di Saia PJ (1980) Methylprednisolone as an antiemetic during cancer chemotherapy—a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol 9:193–198

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sallan SE, Cronin CM (1982) Nausea and vomiting. In: De Vita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA. Cancer principles and practice of oncology (1st edn) Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 1704–1707

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sallan SE, Zinberg NE, Nelson JM (1975) Antiemetic effect of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. New Engl J Med 293:795–797

    Google Scholar 

  20. Seigel LJ, Longo DL (1981) The control of chemotherapy-induced emesis. Ann Intern Med 95:352–359

    Google Scholar 

  21. Siegel S (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stambough JE, McAdams J, Vreeland F (1982) A phase II randomized trial of the antiemetic activity of Levonantradol (CP-50,556) in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Proc AACR/ASCO 23:62

    Google Scholar 

  23. Steel N, Gralla RJ, Braun DW et al (1980) Double-blind comparison of the antiemetic effects of nabilone and prochlorperazine on themotherapy-induced emesis. Cancer Treat Rep 64:219–214

    Google Scholar 

  24. Von Hoff DD, Shilsky R, Reichest CM, et al (1979) Toxic effects of Cisdichlorodiammineplatinum (II) in man. Cancer Treat Rep 63:1527–1531

    Google Scholar 

  25. Williams CJ, Bolton A, De Pemberton R, et al (1980) Antiemetics for patients treated with antitumor chemotherapy. Cancer CI Trials 3:363–367

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Oral presentation at the 19th annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, San Diego, CA, May 22–24, 1983

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Frustaci, S., Grattoni, E., Tumolo, S. et al. Randomized crossover antiemetic study in cisplatin-treated patients. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 17, 75–79 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00299870

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00299870

Keywords

Navigation