Comparison of an orally disintegrating ondansetron tablet with the conventional ondansetron tablet for cyclophosphamide-induced emesis in cancer patients: A multicenter, double-masked study

被引:14
作者
Davidson, N [1 ]
Rapoport, B [1 ]
Erikstein, B [1 ]
L'Esperance, B [1 ]
Ruff, P [1 ]
Paska, W [1 ]
Miller, I [1 ]
Curtis, P [1 ]
机构
[1] Glaxo Wellcome Res & Dev Ltd, Greenford UB6 0HE, Middx, England
关键词
ondansetron; orally disintegrating tablet; emesis; cyclophosphamide; cancer;
D O I
10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88304-6
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
A total of 427 cancer patients receiving cyclophosphamide chemotherapy participated in this multicenter, double-masked, douple-dummy, parallel-group, randomized-study comparing the antiemetic efficacy and safety of an 8-mg conventional ondansetron tablet (OT, n = 212) taken twice daily with an 8-mg orally disintegrating ondansetron tablet (ODT, n = 215) taken twice daily for 3 days. In the primary efficacy analysis, complete or major control of emesis (0 to 2 emetic episodes) between days I and 3 was seen in 80% of OT and 78% of ODT patients. The 90% confidence interval for the differences between treatments was -8.6% to 4.4% (de-fined interval of equivalence, +/-15%), showing that the formulations were equivalent. In the secondary efficacy analysis, no significant differences were observed in the rates of complete control of emesis (no episodes of emesis) over 3 days (63% and 64% of the respective groups) and on day 1 (84% and 81%, respectively) and in the complete control of nausea over 3 days (37% and 43%, respectively) and on day 1 (59% and 61% of patients, respectively). The taste of ODT was acceptable to the majority of patients (89%) who received it. OT and ODT were both well tolerated. Thus 8 mg ODT twice daily represents a palatable, well-tolerated, and effective antiemetic treatment for the control of cyclophosphamide-induced emesis and nausea and provides equivalent treatment to OT 8 mg twice daily.
引用
收藏
页码:492 / 502
页数:11
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], BIOPHARMACEUTICAL ST
[2]  
Armitage P., 1994, STAT METHODS MED RES, P137
[3]  
BECK T, 1998, ANN INTERN MED, V118, P407
[4]   A RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARISON OF ONDANSETRON AND METOCLOPRAMIDE IN THE PROPHYLAXIS OF EMESIS INDUCED BY CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE, FLUOROURACIL, AND DOXORUBICIN OR EPIRUBICIN CHEMOTHERAPY [J].
BONNETERRE, J ;
CHEVALLIER, B ;
METZ, R ;
FARGEOT, P ;
PUJADELAURAINE, E ;
SPIELMANN, M ;
TUBIANAHULIN, M ;
PAES, D ;
BONS, J .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1990, 8 (06) :1063-1069
[5]  
BRITTAIN RT, 1987, BRIT J PHARMACOL, V90, P87
[6]  
BUSER K, 1990, P AN M AM SOC CLIN, V9, P331
[7]  
CASTLE WM, 1992, EUR J ANAESTH, P63
[8]  
COLEMAN R, 1991, BR J CANC S13, V63, pA27
[9]   PREVENTION OF EMESIS IN PATIENTS RECEIVING CYTOTOXIC DRUGS BY GR38032F, A SELECTIVE 5-HT3 RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST [J].
CUNNINGHAM, D ;
POPLE, A ;
FORD, HT ;
HAWTHORN, J ;
GAZET, JC ;
CHALLONER, T ;
COOMBES, RC .
LANCET, 1987, 1 (8548) :1461-1463
[10]  
Dicato M A, 1992, Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), V4, P275, DOI 10.1016/S0936-6555(05)81098-2