Randomized, double-blind, cross-over study comparing prochlorperazine and lorazepam with high-dose metoclopramide and lorazepam for the control of emesis in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Cancer treatment reports Pub Date : 1987-11-01
J F Bishop, M Wolf, J P Matthews, K Scott, S Ackland, K Yuen, C Morton, B L Hillcoat, I A Cooper
{"title":"Randomized, double-blind, cross-over study comparing prochlorperazine and lorazepam with high-dose metoclopramide and lorazepam for the control of emesis in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy.","authors":"J F Bishop,&nbsp;M Wolf,&nbsp;J P Matthews,&nbsp;K Scott,&nbsp;S Ackland,&nbsp;K Yuen,&nbsp;C Morton,&nbsp;B L Hillcoat,&nbsp;I A Cooper","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To further define optimal combinations of antiemetics, high-dose metoclopramide and lorazepam (M+L) were compared with prochlorperazine and lorazepam (P+L) in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Both patient and observer assessments were documented in 66 patients receiving cisplatin and noncisplatin chemotherapy. M+L significantly reduced the severity of vomiting (P = 0.01), duration of vomiting (P = 0.05), and number of vomiting episodes (P = 0.003). Comparing the severity or duration of nausea, M+L and P+L were not significantly different. M+L significantly reduced severity of vomiting (P = 0.005) and number of vomiting episodes (P = 0.03) in the cisplatin subset. The number of vomiting episodes was also reduced in the noncisplatin subset (P = 0.03). When asked to nominate a preferred regimen, 41% of patients preferred P+L, 35% preferred M+L, and 24% rated them equally. M+L was associated with significantly more anxiety and less sedation than P+L. Patient assessments produced similar results to observer assessments but gave a broader understanding of our patients' tolerance to chemotherapy. M+L is a superior regimen in controlling vomiting induced by chemotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":9581,"journal":{"name":"Cancer treatment reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1987-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer treatment reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To further define optimal combinations of antiemetics, high-dose metoclopramide and lorazepam (M+L) were compared with prochlorperazine and lorazepam (P+L) in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Both patient and observer assessments were documented in 66 patients receiving cisplatin and noncisplatin chemotherapy. M+L significantly reduced the severity of vomiting (P = 0.01), duration of vomiting (P = 0.05), and number of vomiting episodes (P = 0.003). Comparing the severity or duration of nausea, M+L and P+L were not significantly different. M+L significantly reduced severity of vomiting (P = 0.005) and number of vomiting episodes (P = 0.03) in the cisplatin subset. The number of vomiting episodes was also reduced in the noncisplatin subset (P = 0.03). When asked to nominate a preferred regimen, 41% of patients preferred P+L, 35% preferred M+L, and 24% rated them equally. M+L was associated with significantly more anxiety and less sedation than P+L. Patient assessments produced similar results to observer assessments but gave a broader understanding of our patients' tolerance to chemotherapy. M+L is a superior regimen in controlling vomiting induced by chemotherapy.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
随机、双盲、交叉研究比较丙氯哌嗪和劳拉西泮与大剂量甲氧氯普胺和劳拉西泮对细胞毒性化疗患者呕吐的控制效果。
为了进一步确定止吐药的最佳组合,在一项随机、双盲、交叉研究中,将大剂量甲氧氯普胺和劳拉西泮(M+L)与丙氯哌嗪和劳拉西泮(P+L)进行比较。对66名接受顺铂和非顺铂化疗的患者进行了患者和观察者评估。M+L可显著降低呕吐严重程度(P = 0.01)、呕吐持续时间(P = 0.05)和呕吐次数(P = 0.003)。比较恶心的严重程度或持续时间,M+L和P+L无显著差异。M+L显著降低顺铂组呕吐严重程度(P = 0.005)和呕吐发作次数(P = 0.03)。非顺铂组呕吐次数也减少(P = 0.03)。当被要求提名首选方案时,41%的患者选择P+L, 35%的患者选择M+L, 24%的患者对它们的评价相同。与P+L相比,M+L显著增加焦虑和减少镇静。患者评估的结果与观察员评估相似,但对患者对化疗的耐受性有了更广泛的了解。M+L是控制化疗引起呕吐的优越方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Lomustine, etoposide, vindesine, and dexamethasone (CEVD) in Hodgkin's lymphoma refractory to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (COPP) and doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD): a multicenter trial of the German Hodgkin Study Group. Controlled clinical trial of doxorubicin and tamoxifen versus doxorubicin alone in hepatocellular carcinoma. Phase II trial of fludarabine phosphate in patients with head and neck cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group Study. Phase II study of fludarabine phosphate in previously untreated patients with colorectal carcinoma: a Southwest Oncology Group Study. Identification of new drugs in small cell lung cancer: phase II agents first?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1