Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
A single-blind comparison of intravenous ondansetron, a selective serotonin antagonist, with intravenous metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.
Ondansetron (GR 38032F), a selective antagonist of serotonin subtype 3 receptors, is effective in the prevention of emesis associated with cisplatin as well as other chemotherapeutic agents. In this randomized, single-blind, multicenter, parallel group study, we compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) ondansetron with IV metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose (greater than or equal to 100 mg/m2) cisplatin chemotherapy. Three hundred seven patients receiving their first dose of cisplatin, either alone or in combination with other antineoplastic agents, were randomized to receive ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg IV every 4 hours for three doses or metoclopramide 2 mg/kg IV every 2 hours for three doses, then every 3 hours for three additional doses. ⋯ Adverse events occurred in 48% of patients receiving ondansetron and 69% of those receiving metoclopramide (P less than .001). Akathisia and acute dystonic reactions occurred only on metoclopramide; headache (controlled with acetaminophen) was significantly more frequent with ondansetron. Ondansetron is more effective, produces fewer adverse events, and is easier to administer than metoclopramide for the prevention of emesis associated with high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Multimodal therapy for the management of primary, nonmetastatic Ewing's sarcoma of bone: a long-term follow-up of the First Intergroup study.
A total of 342 previously untreated eligible children were entered into the first Intergroup Ewing's Sarcoma Study (IESS) between May 1973 and November 1978. In group I institutions, patients were randomized between treatment 1 (radiotherapy to primary lesion plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, dactinomycin, and Adriamycin [doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH] [VAC plus ADR]) or treatment 2 (same as treatment 1 without ADR), and group II institutions randomized patients between treatment 2 or treatment 3 (same as treatment 2 plus bilateral pulmonary radiotherapy [VAC plus BPR]). The percentages of patients relapse-free and surviving (RFS) at 5 years for treatments 1, 2, and 3 were 60%, 24%, and 44%, respectively. ⋯ The overall percentage of patients developing metastatic disease was 44%; the percentages by treatments 1, 2, and 3 were 30%, 72%, and 42%, respectively. The overall incidence of local recurrence was 15%, and there was no evidence that local recurrence rate differed by treatment. Patient characteristics related to prognosis, both with respect to RFS and overall survival experience, were primary site (nonpelvic patients were most favorable) and patient age (younger patients were more favorable).
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16.
The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether tamoxifen (TAM) plus chemotherapy is more effective than TAM alone in improving disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival (S) of positive-node, TAM-responsive patients aged greater than or equal to 50 years. Women were randomized among three treatment groups: (1) TAM alone, (2) Adriamycin (doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH), cyclophosphamide, and TAM (ACT), or (3) melphalan (L-PAM), fluorouracil (5-FU), and TAM (PFT). The PFT arm was later modified so that new patients also received Adriamycin (PAFT). ⋯ Of importance is the failure of these studies to demonstrate an unfavorable interaction between the drug regimens used and the TAM, which was administered simultaneously. The findings related to the use of PAFT and PFT are of more biologic than clinical significance since L-PAM is rarely used in the treatment of breast cancer. The major conclusion from this study is the observance of a better outcome in positive-node breast cancer patients aged greater than or equal to 50 years from the use of postoperative prolonged TAM and short-course AC therapy (completed in 63 days) than from prolonged TAM therapy alone.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Etoposide combined with cyclophosphamide plus vincristine compared with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide plus vincristine and with high-dose cyclophosphamide plus vincristine in the treatment of small-cell carcinoma of the lung: a randomized trial of the Bristol Lung Cancer Study Group.
A total of 353 patients with previously untreated small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) were accrued in this multicenter trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following three regimens: cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) day 1, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 IV day 1, and etoposide 50 mg/m2 IV day 1, followed by etoposide 100 mg/m2/day orally days 2 through 5 (CEV); cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m2 IV day 1, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 IV day 1, and doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 IV day 1 (CAV); cyclophosphamide 2,000 mg/m2 day 1 and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 IV day 1 (CV). Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. ⋯ Cardiotoxicity only occurred in the CAV group (P = .05). The addition of etoposide to the CV regimen resulted in significantly longer response duration and survival without increased toxicity. Similarly, the substitution of etoposide for the doxorubicin in the CAV regimen was associated with prolonged survival and reduced cardiotoxicity.