Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Lymphatic Metastasis , Neoplasm Metastasis/drug therapy , Bone Marrow TransplantationABSTRACT
The antiemetic effect of tropisetron was studied in 97 cancer patients (67 men, 30 women) receiving cisplatin in doses of 75 mg/m² or higher. On 279 chemotherapy cycles studied (max 6 per patient) 5 mg of tropisetron was admonistered once a day i.v. on day 1 and p.o. on day 2 to 6. Efficacy preventing vomiting and nausea was measured in 24 hour period as: complete control 0 episodes, major control 1 to 2 episodes, minor control 3 to 4 episodes and no control 5 or more episodes. Satisfactory vomiting control (complete and major) was 69 percent, 63 percent, 82 percent,88 percent, 96 percent and 96 percent in days 1 to 6 of cycle 1. Satisfactory nausea control (complete and major) for the same day was 70, 66, 72, 85 92 and 97 percent. Similar data was obtained for the subsequeny cycles. Complete vomiting control was obtained in 47, 35, 56, 72, 81 and 84 percent and for nausea in 42, 39, 48, 64, 81 and 87 percent. 19 patients presented adverse effects (19,6 percent). Only 2 headache episodes had a definitive relation with antiemetic drug. 12 patients discontinued the medication; 6 due to drug inefficacy, 2 to illness unrelated to the drug, 1 to lack of collaboration, and 3 due to other reasons. We conclude that tropisetron allows satisfactory control of acute and delayed vomiting in a high percentage of patients treated with high doses of cisplatin. The drug does not have significant secondary effects. Tropisetron administration in only 1 daily dose implies an evident advantage and a treatment cost reduction
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Vomiting/drug therapy , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Nausea/drug therapy , Antiemetics/administration & dosage , Serotonin Antagonists/pharmacokinetics , Drug Therapy/adverse effectsSubject(s)
Humans , Burkitt Lymphoma/diagnosis , Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell/diagnosis , Lymphoma/diagnosis , Neural Tube Defects/diagnosis , Paraproteinemias/diagnosis , Adenoma/diagnosis , Anemia, Refractory, with Excess of Blasts/diagnosis , Blood Platelets/pathology , Erythrocytes, Abnormal/pathology , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/diagnosis , Splenomegaly/diagnosisSubject(s)
Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Humans , Male , Female , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/pathology , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/radiotherapy , Drug Administration Schedule , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Neoplasm StagingABSTRACT
El cáncer gástrico se debe considerar una enfermedad sistémica, sin embargo, hasta ahora, no se cuenta con terapias eficaces para enfrentar esa situación. Hay varios fármacos que tienen actividad sobre la enfermedad (5 FU, Mitomicina C, Adriamicina, Nitrosoureas, Cis-platino, Etopósido, etc.) pero sus porcentajes de respuestas son bajos y por corto tiempo. En los últimos años la asociación de 5FU, Adriamicina y Mitomicina C ha sido desplazada por la combinación Etopósido, Adriamicina y Cis-platino (EAP). Este último esquema tendría un porcentaje de respuesta de 60% y con un 20% de respuestas completas. Hay evidencias además que apoyan el uso de la combinación de radioterapia con quimioterapia como complemento de la cirugía efectuada con criterio curativo y en pacientes con alto riesgo de recaídas. Finalmente los nuevos esquemas de poliquimioterapia ofrecen la posibilidad de hacer operables pacientes que por su extensión local fueron irresecables en una primera intervención. Se concluye que se estaría produciendo una probable mejoría en el manejo sistémico del cáncer gástrico