Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Tonato

Publications and source records attributed to M Tonato.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1992

Antiemetic activity of two different high doses and schedules of metoclopramide in dacarbazine-treated cancer patients.

The antiemetic activity of two different high doses and schedules of metoclopramide in dacarbazine-treated cancer patients was compared in a double-blind crossover study. Regimen A consisted of metoclopramide [2 mg/kg x 4 intravenously (i.v.)] plus methylprednisolone (250 mg x 2 i.v.) plus diphenhydramine (50 mg x 2 i.v.). Regimen B consisted of metoclopramide (3 mg/kg x 2 i.v.) plus dexamethasone (20 mg i.v.) and diphenhydramine (50 mg i.v.). Both treatments were administered for the first 2 days of 5-day dacarbazine chemotherapy. Thirty-two patients (13 men and 19 women) affected by melanoma and sarcoma were entered in the study. Complete protection against nausea and vomiting for the first 2 days of chemotherapy in both antiemetic regimens was not significantly different. Patient preference and tolerance of the two antiemetic treatments were similar. Regimen B, employing a lower dosage of metoclopramide and steroids and using a more simple schedule of administration should be the preferred treatment.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1992

Issues in the measurement of nausea.

Measurement of nausea is essential for the evaluation of efficacy of antiemetic treatment. Frequency, duration and intensity of nausea should be assessed in all trials. Three different methods: a discrete scale (DS), a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a continuous chromatic analogue scale (ACCS) of measuring nausea and four different dimensions maximal intensity, (MI); entity, (E); duration, (D) and quantity, (Q) were evaluated in 849 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. A substantial agreement between the different scales was found and no advantage was shown for using an analogue (VAS) rather than a discrete (DS) scale. There was a trend towards increasing sensitivity in detecting differences as the dimension of nausea used encompassed wider aspects of this symptom (Q more sensitive than E more sensitive than MI).

Antiemetics↗
PubMed1991

[Surgery after neo-adjuvant therapy of non-small cell lung cancer. Preliminary results].

The Authors report their personal experience of surgical treatment following neo-adjuvant therapy in NSCLC (III a N2) in order to assess: 1) the feasibility and safety of surgical treatment following major responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy; 2) the sectile rate; and 3) the survival rate. Preliminary results show that: 1) chemotherapy using cisplatin and VP-16 gives a high rate of major responses in these patients; 2) surgery is feasible; 3) there is high radical sectile rate; 4) further research is needed to obtain statistical significance.

Aged↗
PubMed1991

Radiation therapy in metastatic spinal cord compression. A prospective analysis of 105 consecutive patients.

One hundred thirty consecutive patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) were entered in a therapeutic protocol in which radiation therapy (RT) played the main role. When MSCC is diagnosed by clinical-radiologic methods such as myelography with or without computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), steroids are given and RT treatment started within 24 hours. When diagnostic doubts exist or stabilization is necessary, surgery precedes RT. Chemohormonal potentially responsive tumors are also treated with chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Twelve patients (9.2%) underwent surgery plus RT, and 118 (90.8%) received RT alone. Thirteen (11%) early death patients were not evaluable. The 105 evaluable cases that received RT alone were analyzed. Median follow-up was 15 months (range, 4 to 38 months). Response among patients with back pain was 80%. In cases with motor dysfunction, 48.6% improved, and in 33 of 105 patients (31.4%) without motor disability there was no deterioration. Forty percent of patients with autonomic dysfunction responded to RT. Median survival time was 7 months with a 36% probability of survival for 1 year. The median duration of improvement was 8 months. The most important prognostic factor was early diagnosis. Radiosensitivity of tumor was only important in paraparetic patients in predicting response to RT. Complete myelographic block significantly diminished response to RT. Vertebral collapse did not influence response or survival.

Adult↗
PubMed1991

Double-blind crossover trial of single vs. divided dose of metoclopramide in a combined regimen for treatment of cisplatin-induced emesis.

In a double-blind crossover antiemetic study in cisplatin-treated cancer patients, metoclopramide 4 mg/kg as a single intravenous dose (regimen A) was compared with 3 mg/kg in two doses (regimen B). In both regimens, metoclopramide was combined with dexamethasone and diphenhydramine. 65 consecutive, chemotherapy-naïve inpatients (45 males and 20 females) treated with high doses (at least 50 mg/m2) of cisplatin entered the study and 54 completed both treatments. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea, mean number of emetic episodes, mean maximum intensity of nausea and mean duration of emesis or nausea were similar with the two antiemetic regimens. 23 patients (43%) did not express a treatment preference, while 16 (30%) preferred regimen B and 15 (28%) preferred regimen A. Side-effects were similar with the two metoclopramide schedules. A combined antiemetic regimen of a single high dose of metoclopramide (4 mg/kg) can preserve efficacy and tolerability and thus should be preferred.

Cisplatin↗
PubMed1991

Methodology of antiemetic trials: a review.

Chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting can be controlled with available antiemetics in a high percentage of patients, while emesis remains a critical problem in some subgroups and with certain drugs. In the ceaseless attempt to find newer drugs and better treatment modalities, a sound methodology in antiemetic research is essential. Several factors should always be considered when planning an antiemetic trial: first, the different emetic power of various chemotherapy agents, their dosages and route and schedule of administration and second, the type of antiemetic used, its dosage and timing, and its possible combination with other antiemetics. Important factors which influence outcome but which are often under-evaluated are those related to patient population such as age, gender, and previous experience with chemotherapy. Considering the relevance of subjective phenomena in nausea and vomiting, it is essential that any study be randomized and double blinded. The parallel type of study design is preferable to the cross-over and a large number of patients is usually required to achieve meaningful results. Efficacy and toxicity should be properly evaluated by trained personnel in a standardized way, using a validated, relatively simple methodology.

Adult↗
PubMed1991

Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients' performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales.

The Karnofsky (K) and ECOG (E) performance status (PS) scales are widely used to evaluate the functional status of cancer patients to determine their eligibility for clinical trials and their prognosis, but knowledge of inter and intraobserver variability of these scales is scarse. We therefore planned a prospective study on 209 consecutive cancer patients to evaluate this critical point. Two independent observers evaluated the KPS and EPS of each patient by interviewing them on the same day. After their interviews the patients were asked to fill in, again on the same day, a self-evaluation scale concerning their ability to perform the routine activities of daily life. The 209 patient self-evaluation scales were presented twice, randomly and blinded, to the two observers who had participated in the evaluation of PS as well as to one other observer who had not. The interobserver correlation for both scales was very high (K = 0.921 for KPS and K = 0.914 for EPS) as was the intraobserver correlation (for KPS: K = 0.993, K = 0.960, and K = 0.959 and, respectively, for EPS: K = 0.982, K = 0.970, and K = 0.920). On the basis of these results, it appears that evaluation of PS made by a clinical oncologist using K or E scales can be very reliable and is a guarantee of optimal selection of cancer patients for inclusion in clinical trials.

Aged↗
PubMed1991

Predictive factors of delayed emesis in cisplatin-treated patients and antiemetic activity and tolerability of metoclopramide or dexamethasone. A randomized single-blind study.

To prevent delayed emesis induced by cisplatin (mean dose 90 mg/m2), 120 consecutive patients were randomized to receive, in a 7-day crossover design, oral metoclopramide (20 mg q.i.d.), dexamethasone (1 mg q.i.d.) or placebo (two tablets q.i.d.) starting 24 hours after the end of chemotherapy. Complete protection from nausea, but not from vomiting. was significantly increased by both dexamethasone and metoclopramide with respect to placebo. Important prognostic factors favoring the appearance of delayed emesis were incomplete protection from vomiting during the first 24 hours after cisplatin, female gender, and highest cisplatin doses. Tolerability of both drugs was good. Larger and randomized controlled trials are necessary to identify better preventive treatment of delayed emesis induced by cisplatin.

Cisplatin↗
PubMed1991

Prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis: a double-blind multicenter randomized crossover study comparing ondansetron and ondansetron plus dexamethasone.

Ondansetron (OND) is a new 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that give complete protection from emesis/nausea in approximately 50% of cisplatin (CDDP)-treated patients. To evaluate if dexamethasone (DEX) added to OND increases antiemetic efficacy, we carried out a double-blind randomized crossover study to compare the antiemetic activity of OND with OND plus DEX. One hundred two chemotherapy-naive patients (44 women and 58 men) scheduled to receive CDDP chemotherapy at doses greater than or equal to 50 mg/m2 entered the study. Eighty-nine patients completed both cycles with the following results: complete protection from emesis/nausea was obtained in 57/59 patients (64.0%/66.3%) with OND and in 81/79 (91.0%/88.8%) with OND plus DEX (P = .0005/P = .0021). At the end of the study, 53% of the patients expressed a treatment preference, and of these, 74% chose OND plus DEX compared with 26% who preferred OND alone, a statistically significant difference (P less than .003). Side effects were very mild and not significantly different between the two treatments. We conclude that OND plus DEX is more efficacious than OND in protecting patients from CDDP-induced emesis and nausea.

Antiemetics↗
PubMed1991

Ondansetron plus dexamethasone: an effective combination in high-dose cisplatin therapy. The Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research.

Ondansetron as a single agent has been shown to be superior to metoclopramide in the control of acute nausea and vomiting induced by high-dose cisplatin, complete or major control (0-2 emetic episodes) being achieved in 65-75% of patients. In an attempt to further improve efficacy in this group of patients, a randomised, double-blind, crossover study was carried out comparing ondansetron with ondansetron plus dexamethasone. Ondansetron was given as three intravenous doses (0.15 mg/kg) 2-hourly and dexamethasone as a single intravenous dose of 20 mg prior to cisplatin (median 70 mg/m2, range 50-120 mg/m2). Complete control of emesis was achieved in 91% of patients receiving the combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone and in 64% of patients receiving ondansetron alone (P less than 0.001). Nausea was absent in 89% of patients receiving the combination and in 66% of patients receiving ondansetron alone (P less than 0.0025). Both treatments were well tolerated. The addition of a single dose of dexamethasone to ondansetron significantly improves the control of emesis and nausea compared to ondansetron monotherapy in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

Assessment of nausea.

In a standardized way three different methods of measuring nausea have been assessed in 849 patients enrolled in 4 double blind, randomized, clinical trials, and 2 observational studies. Nausea was measured before and 2, 4, 6, 8 and 24 hours after cancer chemotherapy by using a discrete scale (DS), a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a continuous chromatic analogue scale (ACCS), and it was evaluated according to 4 different dimensions: maximal intensity (MI) entity (E) duration (D) and quantity (Q). The distributions of nausea measurements in the population, agreement between the scales and their sensitivity, and agreement between dimensions and their sensitivity were analyzed. A uniform distribution of nausea measurements was found only in patients receiving chemotherapy without any antiemetic treatment. There was substantial equivalence of the different scales, and no advantage was shown an using an analogue (VAS) than a discrete (DS) scale. A trend toward increasing sensitivity in detecting differences as the dimensions of nausea considered became more inclusive of the various aspects of this symptom (Q more sensible than E more sensible than MI) was observed.

Antiemetics↗
PubMed1990

A pilot study of metoclopramide, dexamethasone, diphenhydramine and acupuncture in women treated with cisplatin.

A total of 26 women who submitted to cisplatin chemotherapy received as antiemetic treatment a combination of metoclopramide, dexamethasone and diphenhydramine. Acupuncture according to traditional Chinese medicine was also carried out. The results were compared with those obtained in a similar group of women with cancer, who were treated in the same setting with the same antiemetic combination but without additional acupuncture. Acupuncture was shown to increase complete protection from nausea and to decrease the intensity and duration of nausea and vomiting. However, the difficulties of performing acupuncture routinely in daily practice are a hindrance to its wider use.

Acupuncture Therapy↗
PubMed1990

A randomized trial fo three cisplatin-containing regimens in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a study of the Umbrian Lung Cancer Group.

Survival in patients with locally advanced (stage III Mo) and metastatic (Ml) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is short. Phase II studies have reported objective responses ranging from 20% to 60% using cisplatin-based chemotherapeutic regimens, yet few have shown improvement in median survival. In our phase II pilot studies with cisplatin (CDDP) and etoposide (VP-16), we observed a 26% response rate; with CDDP, VP-16, and mitomycin-C, a 38% response rate was obtained in advanced NSCLC patients. A total of 156 consecutive patients with locally advanced and metastatic NSCLC were randomized to one of three treatment arms to determine whether the chemotherapy protocols had any effect on response rate and median survival in a large, randomized study. Arm 1 consisted of CDDP (120 mg/m2 x 3 weeks); arm 2, of CDDP (120 mg/m2) and VP-16 (100 mg/m2 given i.v. on days 1-3), repeated every 3 weeks; and arm 3, of CDDP (120 mg/m2) and VP-16 (100 mg/m2 on days 1-3) given every 3 weeks, plus mitomycin C (10 mg/m2 on days 1, 21, and 42, then every 6 weeks, for a maximal dose of 100 mg). After 71 patients had been enrolled in the study, we stopped accrual in the CDDP arm due to a lack of response [1 complete response (CR) in 24 patients; 4%] and continued enrollment in the two combination-chemotherapy arms. In the CDDP/VP-16 arm a 30% response rate [1 CR, 18 partial responses (PRs)] was obtained, and in the CDDP/VP-16 mitomycin C arm a 26% response rate (4 CRs, 11 PRs) was seen among a total of 150 evaluable patients. Responses were observed in 31% of patients with favorable performance status (PS) (ECOG 0-1) vs 14% in patients with a poor PS (ECOG 2-3). Of patients with locally advanced disease (III Mo), 17 (33%) obtained an objective response, compared with 20 patients (20%) with metastatic disease. Median survival was 18 weeks in the CDDP arm, 35 weeks in the CDDP/VP-16 arm, and 37 weeks in the CDDP/VP-16/mitomycin C arm. The median survival in the multimodal chemotherapy arms was significantly greater than that obtained with CDDP alone. Toxicity was predominantly myelosuppression in the mitomycin C-containing arm (27%, wtto grade 3-4). Our study shows that combination chemotherapy using CDDP/VP-16 is active and safe in the treatment of advanced NSCLC patients with a good performance status. The addition of mitomycin C did not improve the therapeutic response.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

Ondansetron (GR38032) in the prophylaxis of acute and delayed cisplatin-induced emesis.

Sixty five chemotherapy naive patients receiving cisplatin (50-120 mg/m2) containing chemotherapy participated in an evaluation of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, in the prophylaxis of acute and delayed nausea and emesis. Ondansetron was given as three 0.15 mg/kg doses intravenously (0.5 h before, 3.5 h and 7.5 h after cisplatin) for acute emesis followed by 8 mg orally 8-hourly for five days at 24 h post-cisplatin for delayed emesis. For acute emesis (first 24 h, n = 63), complete control was achieved in 34 patients (54%) and major control (1-2 episodes) in 16 patients (25%). Complete protection from acute nausea was achieved in 48 patients (76%). For delayed emesis (days 2-6, n = 55), 33 patients (60%) were completely protected or reported one to two episodes during the entire 5-day observation period; 63% reported only mild or no nausea. Ondansetron was well tolerated with no significant drug-related adverse events. These results are consistent with serotonin being a significant transmitter of cisplatin-induced emesis.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1990

A pilot study of metoclopramide, dexamethasone, diphenhydramine and lorazepam in prevention of nausea and vomiting in cisplatin-treated male patients.

In a pilot study we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of a four-drug antiemetic combination (metoclopramide, dexamethasone, diphenhydramine and lorazepam) in cancer patients submitted to cisplatin chemotherapy at doses greater than or equal to 50 mg/m2. Fifty male patients entered the study. Complete protection from vomiting and nausea was obtained in 41 patients (82%) (95% confidence limits 71 and 93%). Toxicity was slight except for moderate sedation in 10% of patients necessitating their hospitalization. Only one extrapyramidal reaction (akathisia) was observed. When these results were compared to our previous experience in male patients treated with a combination of metoclopramide, dexamethasone and diphenhydramine without lorazepam, used at the same doses and schedule, no clear benefit and higher toxicity was observed.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1990

Combination therapy with platinum and etoposide of brain metastases from breast carcinoma.

Twenty-two consecutive patients with brain metastases from breast carcinoma were treated with a combination of platinum (100 mg/m2 day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m2 days 4, 6, 8) every three weeks. Five (23%) achieved a complete response (CR) while 7 (32%) obtained a partial response (PR) for an overall response rate of 55%. The 95% confidence interval for combined CR and PR was 34-76%. Five patients received brain irradiation after reaching the maximum degree of objective remission by chemotherapy. Median duration of combined CR plus PR was 40 weeks (12+; 152). Median duration of survival was 58 weeks (2; 208+). Fifty-five percent of the patients were alive at one year. Our study demonstrates that this combination treatment is highly effective in the management of brain metastases from breast carcinoma.

Adult↗