Randomized, Multicenter Comparison of Oral Granisetron and Oral Ondansetron for Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Herrington, Jon D.; Kwan, P.; Young, Robyn R.; Lagow, Elaine; Lagrone, Lore; Riggs, Mark

doi:10.1592/phco.20.17.1318.34894

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the introduction of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (e.g. ondansetron, granisetron) for anti-emetic therapy more than half of patients who receive chemotherapy continue to experience nausea (Herrington et al, 2000;Morrow et al, 2000). Even with the newer, tachykinin NK1 receptor antagonists (e.g., aprepitant) there is less than complete control of the nausea component of chemotherapy (Andrews and Rudd, 2004).…”

Section: Neural Circuitry For Nauseamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5-HT3 receptor antagonists are very effective blockers of the acute phase of vomiting and partially control the nausea produced by chemotherapy (e.g., Cassidy et al, 1988;Massidda and Ionta, 1996;Morrow et al, 2002b). However, despite the introduction of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for anti-emetic therapy more than half of patients who receive chemotherapy continue to experience nausea (Herrington et al, 2000;Morrow et al, 2000). Unlike emesis, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists might have their primary effect on nausea through direct action on the brain.…”

Section: Visceral Afferent Fibresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Andrews

Horn

2006

Autonomic Neuroscience

221

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nausea and vomiting are amongst the most common symptoms encountered in medicine as either symptoms of diseases or side effects of treatments. In a more biological setting they are also important components of an organism's defences against ingested toxins. Identification of treatments for nausea and vomiting and reduction of emetic liability of new therapies has largely relied on the use of animal models, and although such models have proven invaluable in identification of the anti-emetic effects of both 5-hydroxytryptamine3 and neurokinin1 receptor antagonists selection of appropriate models is still a matter of debate. The present paper focuses on a number of controversial issues and gaps in our knowledge in the study of the physiology of nausea and vomiting including: The choice of species for the study of emesis and the underlying behavioural (e.g. neophobia), anatomical (e.g. elongated, narrow abdominal oesophagus with reduced ability to shorten) and physiological (e.g. brainstem circuitry) mechanisms that explain the lack of a vomiting reflex in certain species (e.g. rats); The choice of response to measure (emesis[retching and vomiting], conditioned flavour avoidance or aversion, ingestion of clay [pica], plasma hormone levels[e.g. vasopressin], gastric dysrhythmias) and the relationship of these responses to those observed in humans and especially to the sensation of nausea; The stimulus coding of nausea and emesis by abdominal visceral afferents and especially the vagus-how do the afferents encode information for normal postprandial sensations, nausea and finally vomiting?; Understanding the central processing of signals for nausea and vomiting is particularly problematic in the light of observations that vomiting is more readily amenable to pharmacological treatment than is nausea, despite the assumption that nausea represents "low" intensity activation of pathways that can evoke vomiting when stimulated more intensely.

show abstract

Section: Neural Circuitry For Nauseamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Visceral Afferent Fibresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Andrews

Horn

2006

Autonomic Neuroscience

221

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it is noteworthy that while 8 mg of intravenous ondansetron is recommended by guidelines [3] and is commonly used in clinical practice, the prescribing information recommends a single high dose or multiple daily doses. Oral ondansetron, 16 mg, has been found to be effective when used with a corticosteroid in the treatment of emesis resulting from moderately emetogenic chemotherapy [42, 43] and for oral administration, 8 mg ondansetron twice daily is currently recommended by guidelines [3]. A once-daily 8-mg dose of oral ondansetron has also been investigated, but it failed to prevent nausea and vomiting following moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and as such, is not recommended [44].…”

Section: The Influence Of Different Chemotherapy Regimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

5-HT<sub>3</sub>-Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Nausea and Vomiting in Cancer and Cancer Treatment

Aapro¹

2005

Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 5-HT₃-receptor antagonists, considered as ‘gold standard’ therapy for cancer patients, are generally perceived to have similar efficacy and safety profiles, andmost antiemetic guidelines do not distinguish between agents. However, important pharmacological differences exist between agents, which may translate into potential benefits for some patients. In particular, 5-HT₃-receptor antagonists vary in the nature of their receptor antagonism and plasma half-lives, possibly leading to differences in duration of action. Agents with a longer duration of action provide antiemetic protection throughout the acute emetic period (24 h) with a single daily dose, whereas shorter-acting agents, e.g. ondansetron, may require multiple dosing for full efficacy. Differences also exist between agents in their hepatic metabolism and cardiovascular safety, which may present particular problems for elderly patients who often receive additional medications for comorbid conditions, increasing the risk of drug-drug interaction. Recent antiemetic guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend preferential use of palonosetron for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy; however, this agent is newly approved and key clinical questions remain unanswered by clinical trial data. Selection of an appropriate 5-HT₃-receptor antagonist should be based on proven efficacy and safety, as well as on the individual characteristics of the patient.

show abstract

“…Similarly, strategies aimed at reducing the incidence and severity of delayed CINV include the combination of a corticosteroid and either a dopamine receptor antagonist or a 5-HT 3 antagonist for 3-5 days post chemotherapy [15,28]. Complete protection from vomiting in the first 24 h is achieved in as many as 70-90% of patients receiving moderately-high and highly emetogenic chemotherapy; however, standard antiemetics only protect 50% of patients from experiencing nausea during this acute CINV phase [31,18]. Delayed nausea and vomiting is less well defined and controlled, with as many as 50% of patients experiencing nausea and vomiting in the 3 to 5 day period following the first day of chemotherapy [18,2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Complete protection from vomiting in the first 24 h is achieved in as many as 70-90% of patients receiving moderately-high and highly emetogenic chemotherapy; however, standard antiemetics only protect 50% of patients from experiencing nausea during this acute CINV phase [31,18]. Delayed nausea and vomiting is less well defined and controlled, with as many as 50% of patients experiencing nausea and vomiting in the 3 to 5 day period following the first day of chemotherapy [18,2]. Both acute and delayed CINV remain a significant problem in patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy for autologous or allogeneic transplantation where up to 90% of patients experience CINV despite prophylactic strategies [27,1,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized double-blind study of the Reliefband as an adjunct to standard antiemetics in patients receiving moderately-high to highly emetogenic chemotherapy

Treish

Shord

Valgus

et al. 2003

Supportive Care in Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study suggests that patients receiving moderately-high to highly emetogenic chemotherapy who experience nausea and vomiting despite scheduled antiemetics may benefit from the use of the Reliefband as an adjunct to antiemetics. Limitations of this study include differences in risk factors for emesis, chemotherapy, and antiemetic regimens. A larger, better, controlled randomized study is needed to better define optimal use of this device.

show abstract

Randomized, Multicenter Comparison of Oral Granisetron and Oral Ondansetron for Emetogenic Chemotherapy

Abstract: Oral granisetron 1 mg and ondansetron 16 mg plus dexamethasone are safe and effective in preventing nausea and vomiting related to emetogenic chemotherapy.

Cited by 14 publications

References 15 publications

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

5-HT<sub>3</sub>-Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Nausea and Vomiting in Cancer and Cancer Treatment

Randomized double-blind study of the Reliefband as an adjunct to standard antiemetics in patients receiving moderately-high to highly emetogenic chemotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About