The subrenal capsule assay in selecting chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: a prospective randomized trial.

In order to find out whether the response rate and survival in epithelial ovarian cancer can be improved by aid of sensitivity testing with the subrenal capsule assay (SRCA), 196 patients with FIGO Stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer were randomized to be treated with either cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin-cisplatin (CAP) or SRCA-guided chemotherapy. The drug combinations tested with the SRCA were (1) cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin-carboplatin (CACAR), (2) CAP, (3) carboquone-methotrexate-tegafur (CQ-MTX-TEG), (4) cisplatin-etoposide-hexamethyl-melamine (P-VP-HXM), and (5) bleomycin-epirubicin-cisplatin (BEP). A total of 132 patients (CAP, 69; SRCA, 63) were eligible for efficacy analysis based on relaparotomy findings. The overall response rate was 59% in the CAP arm and 62% in the SRCA arm. In the SRCA arm, 16 patients were treated with CACAR, 24 with CAP, 10 with CQ-MTX-TEG, 11 with P-VP-HXM, and 2 with BEP. The response rate to CACAR was 63% and to SRCA-CAP was 75%. The number of complete responses was higher when CAP was given as guided by the assay than when given at random (14/24 vs 23/69; P = 0.03, Pearson chi 2). Survival curves as estimated by Kaplan-Meier method gave a median survival of 24 (SE = 4) months to the SRCA arm and 28 (SE = 5) for the CAP arm (P = 0.7; log-rank test). Because no survival benefit was achieved, the SRCA obviously needs further development before it can be routinely recommended in the choice of first-line chemotherapy for patients with ovarian cancer.

Comparison of ondansetron with customary treatment in the prophylaxis of nausea and emesis induced by non-cisplatin containing chemotherapy.

One hundred cancer patients receiving non-cisplatin containing chemotherapy were entered in a prospective study in which the efficacy of ondansetron was compared with standard antiemetic treatments in the prophylaxis of nausea and emesis. During the first 24 h, 77% of patients on ondansetron reported complete control of emesis compared with 56% of those on customary treatments (p = 0.03). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between ondansetron and customary treatments in control of delayed emesis on days 2-5. Nor was any statistically significant difference seen between ondansetron and customary treatments in preventing acute or delayed nausea.