2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: prevention of nausea and vomiting following high-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents.

PURPOSE: This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine, dacarbazine, mechlorethamine, streptozocin, and cyclophosphamide in doses of > 1500 mg/m2 and the combination of cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline (AC) in women with breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic review report following the PRISMA guidelines of the literature from January 1, 2015, until February 1, 2023, was performed. PubMed (Ovid), Scopus (Google), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. The literature search was limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. RESULTS: Forty-six new references were determined to be relevant. The main topics identified were (1) steroid-sparing regimens, (2) olanzapine-containing regimens, and (3) other issues such as comparisons of antiemetics of the same drug class, intravenous NK1 receptor antagonists, and potentially new antiemetics. Five updated recommendations are presented. CONCLUSION: There is no need to prescribe steroids (dexamethasone) beyond day 1 after AC HEC, whereas a 4-day regimen is recommended in non-AC HEC. Olanzapine is now recommended as a fixed part of a four-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen in both non-AC and AC HEC. No major differences between 5-HT3 receptor antagonists or between NK1 receptor antagonists were identified. No new antiemetic agents qualified for inclusion in the updated recommendations.

Phase III safety study of intravenous NEPA: a novel fixed antiemetic combination of fosnetupitant and palonosetron in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Background: NEPA, an oral fixed combination of the NK1RA netupitant (300 mg) and clinically/pharmacologically distinct 5-HT3RA palonosetron (PALO, 0.50 mg), is the first fixed antiemetic combination to have been approved. A single oral NEPA capsule plus dexamethasone (DEX) given before anthracycline-cyclophosphamide (AC) and non-AC highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) showed superior prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) over PALO plus DEX for 5 days postchemotherapy. The safety of NEPA was well-established in the phase II/III clinical program in 1169 NEPA-treated patients. An intravenous (i.v.) formulation of the NEPA combination (fosnetupitant 235 mg plus PALO 0.25 mg) has been developed. Patients and methods: This randomized, multinational, double-blind, stratified (by sex and country) phase III study (NCT02517021) in chemotherapy-naïve patients with solid tumors assessed the safety of a single dose of i.v. NEPA infused over 30 min before initial and repeated cycles of HEC. Patients received either i.v. NEPA or oral NEPA, both with oral DEX on days 1-4. Safety was assessed primarily by treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and electrocardiograms. Results: A total of 404 patients completed 1312 cycles. The incidence and type of treatment-emergent AEs were similar for both treatment groups with the majority of AEs as mild/moderate in intensity. There was no increased incidence of AEs in subsequent cycles in either group. The incidence of treatment-related AEs was similar and relatively low in both groups (12.8% i.v. NEPA and 11.4% oral NEPA during the entire study), with constipation being the most common (6.4% i.v. NEPA, 6.0% oral NEPA). No serious treatment-related AEs occurred in either group. No infusion site or anaphylactic reactions related to i.v. NEPA occurred. No clinically relevant changes in QTc and no cardiac safety concerns were observed. Conclusions: Intravenous NEPA was well-tolerated with a similar safety profile to oral NEPA in patients with various solid tumors receiving HEC.

Rolapitant hydrochloride: prophylactic treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a significant clinical issue which affects patients' quality of life as well as treatment decisions. Significant improvements in the control of CINV have occurred in the past 15 years with the introduction of new antiemetic agents: 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, tachykinin NK1 receptor antagonists and olanzapine. Aprepitant was the first NK1 receptor antagonist introduced (2003) for the prevention of CINV in combination with a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. Two additional NK1 receptor antagonists, netupitant and rolapitant, were approved by the FDA in 2014 and 2015, respectively. A description of rolapitant and its role in CINV will be presented, along with a comparison to the other NK1 receptor antagonists, aprepitant and netupitant.

Rationally engineered nanoparticles target multiple myeloma cells, overcome cell-adhesion-mediated drug resistance, and show enhanced efficacy in vivo.

In the continuing search for effective cancer treatments, we report the rational engineering of a multifunctional nanoparticle that combines traditional chemotherapy with cell targeting and anti-adhesion functionalities. Very late antigen-4 (VLA-4) mediated adhesion of multiple myeloma (MM) cells to bone marrow stroma confers MM cells with cell-adhesion-mediated drug resistance (CAM-DR). In our design, we used micellar nanoparticles as dynamic self-assembling scaffolds to present VLA-4-antagonist peptides and doxorubicin (Dox) conjugates, simultaneously, to selectively target MM cells and to overcome CAM-DR. Dox was conjugated to the nanoparticles through an acid-sensitive hydrazone bond. VLA-4-antagonist peptides were conjugated via a multifaceted synthetic procedure for generating precisely controlled number of targeting functionalities. The nanoparticles were efficiently internalized by MM cells and induced cytotoxicity. Mechanistic studies revealed that nanoparticles induced DNA double-strand breaks and apoptosis in MM cells. Importantly, multifunctional nanoparticles overcame CAM-DR, and were more efficacious than Dox when MM cells were cultured on fibronectin-coated plates. Finally, in a MM xenograft model, nanoparticles preferentially homed to MM tumors with ∼10 fold more drug accumulation and demonstrated dramatic tumor growth inhibition with a reduced overall systemic toxicity. Altogether, we demonstrate the disease driven engineering of a nanoparticle-based drug delivery system, enabling the model of an integrative approach in the treatment of MM.

International study in premedical education.

This study surveyed medical school admission deans about the desirability of international study. Most agreed that an international study program in the premedical years was beneficial, but most were neutral concerning science courses taken in international programs.

A prisoner with chronic myeloid leukemia.

The health care received by prisoners in the area of tissue and organ transplantation is not well discussed or documented. We encountered a prisoner with newly diagnosed chronic myelogenous leukemia who was a candidate for allogeneic bone marrow transplantation and had two HLA-identical siblings who were willing to donate bone marrow. Based on humanitarian, constitutional, and ethical considerations, we suggest that the prisoner (patient) should receive the same health care as individuals who are not incarcerated and that the costs of care should play no greater role for prisoners than for other members of society.

Reduction of cisplatin-induced emesis by a selective neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist. L-754,030 Antiemetic Trials Group.

BACKGROUND: The localization of substance P in brain-stem regions associated with vomiting, and the results of studies in ferrets, led us to postulate that a neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist would be an antiemetic in patients receiving anticancer chemotherapy. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 159 patients who had not previously received cisplatin, we evaluated the prevention of acute emesis (occurring within 24 hours) and delayed emesis (on days 2 to 5) after a single dose of cisplatin therapy (70 mg or more per square meter of body-surface area). Before receiving cisplatin, all the patients received granisetron (10 microg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) and dexamethasone (20 mg orally). The patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatments in addition to granisetron and dexamethasone: 400 mg of an oral trisubstituted morpholine acetal (also known as L-754,030) before cisplatin and 300 mg on days 2 to 5 (group 1), 400 mg of L-754,030 before cisplatin and placebo on days 2 to 5 (group 2), or placebo before cisplatin and placebo on days 2 to 5 (group 3). Additional medication was available at any time to treat occurrences of vomiting or nausea. RESULTS: In the acute-emesis phase, 93 percent of the patients in groups 1 and 2 combined and 67 percent of those in group 3 had no vomiting (P<0.001). In the delayed-emesis phase, 82 percent of the patients in group 1, 78 percent of those in group 2, and 33 percent of those in group 3 had no vomiting (P<0.001 for the comparison between group 1 or 2 and group 3). The median nausea score in the delayed-emesis phase was significantly lower in group 1 than in group 3 (P=0.003). No serious adverse events were attributed to L-754,030. CONCLUSIONS: The neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist L-754,030 prevents delayed emesis after treatment with cisplatin. Moreover, combining L-754,030 with granisetron plus dexamethasone improves the prevention of acute emesis.

Single-dose oral granisetron has equivalent antiemetic efficacy to intravenous ondansetron for highly emetogenic cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the antiemetic efficacy of a single dose of an oral antiemetic (granisetron 2 mg) with a single dose of an intravenous (i.v.) antiemetic (ondansetron 32 mg) given before cisplatin-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Patients (N = 1,054) scheduled to receive cisplatin (> or = 60 mg/m2)-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive either 2 mg of oral granisetron tablets 1 hour before chemotherapy (n = 534) or i.v. ondansetron (32 mg) 30 minutes before chemotherapy (n = 520). The primary efficacy end point was total control (no emesis, no nausea, and no use of antiemetic rescue medication) over the initial 24 hours after the start of chemotherapy. Dexamethasone or methylprednisolone were permitted, but not required, as concomitant prophylactic antiemetics. RESULTS: Total control was equivalent 24 hours after cisplatin chemotherapy for single-dose oral granisetron (54.7%) and i.v. ondansetron (58.3%) (95% confidence interval [CI], -9.6 to 2.4). Similar proportions of patients remained nausea-free in the granisetron group (55.4%) and the ondansetron group (59%) (95% CI, -9.6 to 2.4). The rate of complete control of emesis was 61.2% in the granisetron group and 67.1% in the ondansetron group (95% CI, -11.7 to -0.1). Both treatment regimens were well tolerated, with similar patterns of adverse reactions, generally of a mild degree. The most common side effects included constipation (14%), headache (15%), and diarrhea (10%). CONCLUSION: Oral granisetron, administered as a single 2-mg dose, provided equivalent total antiemetic control when compared with i.v. ondansetron (32 mg) in patients who received highly emetogenic, cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Phase III double-blind comparison of dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron and an evaluation of the additive role of dexamethasone in the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting due to moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of dolasetron and ondansetron in controlling nausea and vomiting in the first 24 hours; to evaluate the efficacy when dexamethasone is added to either drug in the first 24 hours; and to extend these comparisons over 7 days in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized study with six parallel arms that used a 2 x 2 factorial design in chemotherapy-naive patients. In arm 1, dolasetron (2.4 mg/kg) was given intravenously (I.V.) prechemotherapy, followed 24 hours later by oral dolasetron (200 mg once daily) for 6 days. Arms 2 and 3 consisted of dolasetron and dexamethasone 8 mg I.V., followed 24 hours later by oral dexamethasone (8 mg once daily) in one arm, and oral dexamethasone and dolasetron in the other, also for 6 days. In arms 4, 5, and 6, ondansetron (32 mg I.V. or 8 mg orally twice daily) was administered in a similar manner to arms 1, 2, and 3 before and 24 hours after chemotherapy. Mean nausea severity (MNS) was assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) in a daily diary. RESULTS: Of 703 patients enrolled, 696 were eligible. There were 343 dolasetron- and 353 ondansetron-treated patients; 57% of dolasetron-treated patients had complete protection in the first 24 hours versus 67% of patients who received ondansetron (P = .013). MNS was also more pronounced on the dolasetron arm (P = .051). Sixty-seven percent of patients who received added dexamethasone in the first 24 hours had complete protection, compared with 55% without dexamethasone (P < .001). MNS was significantly reduced with the addition of dexamethasone (P < .001). At 7 days, dolasetron and ondansetron had equivalent complete protection rates (36% and 39%, respectively). With the addition of dexamethasone, 48% of patients compared with 28% had complete protection (P < .001). MNS was significantly improved with added dexamethasone (P < .001). CONCLUSION: At the doses used, dolasetron was significantly less effective than ondansetron at controlling nausea and vomiting in the first 24 hours in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, but there was no demonstrable difference between both drugs over 7 days. The addition of dexamethasone significantly improved the efficacy of both drugs in the first 24 hours and over 7 days.

Prevention of acute emesis in cancer patients following high-dose cisplatin with the combination of oral dolasetron and dexamethasone.

PURPOSE: Dolasetron is a 5-HT3 antagonist antiemetic with active oral and intravenous formulations. The effects of this class are enhanced when combined with dexamethasone. This study tested the ability of the combination of oral dolasetron 200 mg and oral dexamethasone 20 mg to prevent acute emesis in cancer patients receiving initial cisplatin at doses > or = 70 mg/m2. Additionally, patients were randomly assigned to receive a second dosage of the regimen 16 hours later to improve control of acute symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 75 patients were entered, with 38 randomized to the two-dose regimen. Thirty-five percent were women and 77% had lung cancer. RESULTS: Overall, the regimen prevented acute vomiting in 76% (95% confidence interval, 65% to 85%), including 74% of 35 patients who received cisplatin at doses > or = 100 mg/m2. There was no observed difference in emesis prevention between the one-dose (76%) and two-dose (76%) regimens (95% confidence interval for the difference, -20% to 19%). The median time to the onset of emesis was 19 hours for the one-dose regimen and 17 hours for the two-dose regimen in those patients with emesis. Headache occurred in 11% who received one dose and 16% who received two doses. CONCLUSION: The combination of oral dolasetron 200 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg given only once prevented acute emesis in 76% of patients who received cisplatin > or = 70 mg/m2. Administration of a second dose of the regimen did not improve the observed prevention rate or delay the time to emesis. This one-dose oral regimen has comparable or better effectiveness than reported results of intravenous combination regimens in preventing cisplatin-induced vomiting and merits further study and use.

The role of the 5-HT3 antagonists ondansetron and dolasetron in the control of delayed onset nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: 5-HT3 antagonists are effective in reducing the acute nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. However, it is not clear whether continuing these agents beyond twenty four hours is useful in controlling emesis on days two to seven after chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred seven patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy who had been given dexamethasone 8 mg i.v. and either ondansetron 32 mg i.v. or dolasetron 2.4 mg/kg i.v. were randomized to continue either an oral form of their 5-HT3 antagonist (ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d. or dolasetron 200 mg daily) plus dexamethasone 8 mg p.o. daily or dexamethasone alone for days two to seven. Endpoints assessed by self-report were: 1) complete control (no vomiting, no rescue medications, no missing data) of emesis; 2) nausea severity; and 3) quality-of-life as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. RESULTS: Continuation of 5-HT3 antagonists improved slightly, but not significantly, the complete control rate (47% vs. 41%: P = 0.24 one-sided) after chemotherapy. However, mean nausea severity was significantly (P = 0.015 one sided) reduced (by 3 mm on a 10 cm scale) on the combined arm. Minimal differences in quality of life were observed. CONCLUSION: The benefit of continuing 5-HT3 antagonists beyond 24 hours is modest and the merits of routine use in these circumstances debatable.

Oral ondansetron 8 mg twice daily is as effective as 8 mg three times daily in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with moderately emetogenic cancer chemotherapy. S3A-376 Study Group.

The efficacy and safety of ondansetron 8 mg BID compared with 8 mg TID for 3 days in the prevention of nausea and vomiting in 402 patients on cyclophosphamide (> or = 500 mg/m2)-based chemotherapy were evaluated in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, stratified study. The percentage of patients with no emetic episodes over the 3-day study period was 61% in the ondansetron BID group compared with 58% in the ondansetron TID group. Among patients with at least one emetic episode, the mean time to emesis was 14 hr and 17 min in the ondansetron BID group compared with 12 hr and 48 min in the ondansetron TID group. Patients' daily appetite ratings and nausea scores were not significantly different between groups. Clinical laboratory and adverse event profiles were similar between groups. This study is the first large-scale, double-blind trial to demonstrate that ondansetron 8 mg BID for 3 days, a dosing regimen that may enhance patient convenience and compliance, is as effective as ondansetron 8 mg TID for 3 days in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of different doses of granisetron for the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of four different doses of granisetron when administered as a single intravenous (i.v.) dose for prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis in a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind investigation. A total of 353 chemotherapy-naive patients were enrolled, stratified according to cisplatin dose (moderate dose: 50-80 mg/m2, n = 169; high dose: 81-120 mg/m2, n = 184) and randomized to one of four granisetron doses: 5, 10, 20, or 40 micrograms/kg. Control of emesis was evaluated by the percentages of patients attaining complete response (no vomiting or retching, and no rescue medication) and major response (< or = 2 episodes of vomiting or retching, and no rescue medication). Patients were assessed on an inpatient basis for 18-24 h. Safety analyses consisted of adverse events and laboratory parameter changes. Complete response rates over 24 h after chemotherapy were 23%, 48%, 48%, and 44% for granisetron doses of 5, 10, 20, and 40 micrograms/kg, respectively, in the combined patient population (P = 0.011 for linear trend); 29%, 56%, 58%, and 41%, respectively, in the moderate-dose cisplatin stratum (P = 0.278 for linear trend); and 18%, 41%, 40%, and 47%, respectively, in the high-dose cisplatin stratum (P = 0.011 for linear trend). Transient headache was the most frequently reported adverse event (19%). There was no evidence of association between increased dose and headache. A single 10-, 20- or 40-micrograms/kg dose of granisetron is comparably effective in controlling nausea and vomiting associated with moderate or high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy. Granisetron was safe and well tolerated at all doses.

Fadrozole hydrochloride in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Fadrozole hydrochloride (CGS-16949A) belongs to the class of aromatase inhibitors that lowers circulating estrogen levels by inhibiting the conversion of androgens to estrogens, thereby causing tumor regression in patients with breast carcinoma. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, Phase II study of fadrozole hydrochloride in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast carcinoma. The three treatment groups received, respectively, fadrozole hydrochloride 0.6 mg three times daily, 1 mg twice daily, and 2 mg twice daily orally. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were entered on protocol and 54 were eligible (2 patients were perimenopausal). Eight patients had received no prior therapy, 15 patients had received prior hormonal therapy, 5 patients had received prior chemotherapy, and 28 patients had received both. After 12 weeks of treatment, 2 complete and 3 partial responses were observed. Forty patients continued treatment beyond 12 weeks, and 3 additional responses were achieved. Thus, 8 of 56 patients responded (14% overall response rate). Responses did not appear to be dose-related. The median duration of response was 36 months (range, 8-45 months). Subjective toxicity was mild to moderate and appeared more frequent on the 2 mg twice daily dosing schedule. No objective toxicity in laboratory parameters was observed. No patient had severe or life-threatening toxicity. Fadrozole hydrochloride plasma concentrations (obtained every 2 weeks for 12 weeks) appeared to be dose-dependent and noncumulative. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms modest activity of fadrozole hydrochloride in a heterogeneous group of patients with breast carcinoma treated at three different dose levels.

Double-blind, randomized comparison of the antiemetic efficacy of intravenous dolasetron mesylate and intravenous ondansetron in the prevention of acute cisplatin-induced emesis in patients with cancer. Dolasetron Comparative Chemotherapy-induced Emesis Prevention Group.

PURPOSE: To assess the comparative antiemetic efficacy of single-dose intravenous (IV) dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron in preventing cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cancer patients (n = 609) receiving first-course cisplatin chemotherapy were randomized to one of three treatments: 1.8 or 2.4 mg/kg dolasetron mesylate salt (equivalent to 1.3 and 1.8 mg/kg dolasetron base, respectively) or 32 mg ondansetron. Each treatment was infused over 15 minutes, 30 minutes before cisplatin administration. Patients were stratified to cisplatin doses of > or = 70 and less than 91 mg/m2 (n = 368) or > or = 91 mg/m2 (n = 241), administered over < or = 3 hours. Protocol-defined efficacy criteria included complete response (zero emetic episodes and no rescue medication), major response (1 to 2 emetic episodes and no rescue medication), and patients' report of nausea severity and satisfaction recorded on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The three treatments met protocol-specified criteria for equivalence. Complete response rates for dolasetron mesylate 1.8 mg/kg, 2.4 mg/kg, and ondansetron, respectively, were 49.2%, 45.6%, and 50.4% for patients in the lower cisplatin stratum (mean, 74.7 mg/m2) and 36.8%, 31.3%, and 31.8% in the higher cisplatin stratum (mean, 100.6 mg/m2). No significant differences were observed in the extent of nausea with either dolasetron dose compared with ondansetron. Less nausea was noted with 1.8 mg/kg dolasetron compared with the 2.4 mg/kg dose (P = .044) All three antiemetic treatments were well tolerated. Asymptomatic electrocardiogram changes were recorded with both dolasetron and ondansetron. CONCLUSION: A single IV dose of dolasetron mesylate (1.8 or 2.4 mg/kg) has comparable safety and efficacy to a single 32-mg IV dose of ondansetron in patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy.

Oral ondansetron for the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis: a large, multicenter, double-blind, randomized comparative trial of ondansetron versus placebo.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of oral ondansetron in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis in patients who do not require rescue antiemetic therapy for acute emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred thirty-eight chemotherapy-naive patients who received cisplatin chemotherapy (> or = 70 mg/m2), and who were not rescued for acute emesis, were eligible to be randomized to receive one of the three oral regimens to control delayed emesis. Group I received placebo on days 2 to 6; group II received ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 2 and 3 and placebo on days 4 to 6; group III received ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 2 to 6. All patients received intravenous ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg every 4 hours for three doses) for the control of acute emesis on day 1. The number of emetic episodes on days 2 and 3 combined (days 2/3, when incidence and severity of delayed emesis were expected to be greatest) was considered the primary measure of efficacy. RESULTS: Patients who received odansetron had significantly fewer emetic episodes on days 2/3, 4, and 5 than those who received placebo (P < or = .002 on each day). Additionally, significantly more patients who received ondansetron had a complete plus major response (C+MR; < or = two two emetic episodes) than those who received placebo on days 2/3 (56% v 37%, P = .001), 4 (94% v 85%, P = .005), and 5 (98% v 88%, P = .006). Patients who received ondansetron had significantly less nausea on day 2/3 when day-1 nausea was used as the baseline score (P = .025). Patients who received ondansetron also had significantly less nausea on day 4 (P = .042) and the results approached significance on day 5 (P = .066). CONCLUSION: Oral ondansetron had a significant effect in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis and nausea in patients who had not required rescue antiemetics during the acute emesis period. The control of delayed nausea and vomiting was most notable in the immediate 2 days following cisplatin administration, with the clinical difference narrowing between the two treatment arms on subsequent days.

Comparative clinical trial of granisetron and ondansetron in the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced emesis. The Granisetron Study Group.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of granisetron and ondansetron, serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists shown to be effective in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, stratified, parallel-group study, the efficacy and safety of granisetron and ondansetron were compared in 987 chemotherapy-naive patients who received cisplatin in doses > or = 60 mg/m2. Granisetron was administered as a single dose of 10 or 40 micrograms/kg before the start of chemotherapy. Ondansetron was administered in doses of 0.15 mg/kg before and 4 and 8 hours after the start of chemotherapy. The three treatment groups were well-matched with respect to demographic characteristics and the dose of cisplatin administered. RESULTS: For all evaluations, single doses of granisetron 10 or 40 micrograms/kg were as effective as three 0.15-mg/kg doses of ondansetron. Total control (no vomiting, no retching, no nausea, and no use of rescue) was attained by 38%, 41%, and 39% of all patients who received granisetron 10 microgram/kg, granisetron 40 micrograms/kg, and ondansetron, respectively. No vomiting or retching and no use of rescue antiemetics were reported in 47%, 48%, and 51% of patients who received granisetron 10 micrograms/kg, granisetron 40 micrograms/kg, and ondansetron, respectively; no nausea and no use of rescue antiemetics were reported in 39%, 42%, and 40% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: All three treatment regimens were well-tolerated. The results of this study indicate that a single dose of granisetron 10 or 40 micrograms/kg is as effective as three doses of ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin chemotherapy.