Comparison of an orally disintegrating ondansetron tablet with the conventional ondansetron tablet for cyclophosphamide-induced emesis in cancer patients: a multicenter, double-masked study. Ondansetron Orally Disintegrating Tablet Emesis Study Group.

A total of 427 cancer patients receiving cyclophosphamide chemotherapy participated in this multicenter, double-masked, double-dummy, parallel-group, randomized study comparing the antiemetic efficacy and safety of an 8-mg conventional ondansetron tablet (OT, n = 212) taken twice daily with an 8-mg orally disintegrating ondansetron tablet (ODT, n = 215) taken twice daily for 3 days. In the primary efficacy analysis, complete or major control of emesis (0 to 2 emetic episodes) between days 1 and 3 was seen in 80% of OT and 78% of ODT patients. The 90% confidence interval for the differences between treatments was -8.6% to 4.4% (defined interval of equivalence, +/-15%), showing that the formulations were equivalent. In the secondary efficacy analysis, no significant differences were observed in the rates of complete control of emesis (no episodes of emesis) over 3 days (63% and 64% of the respective groups) and on day 1 (84% and 81%, respectively) and in the complete control of nausea over 3 days (37% and 43%, respectively) and on day 1 (59% and 61% of patients, respectively). The taste of ODT was acceptable to the majority of patients (89%) who received it. OT and ODT were both well tolerated. Thus 8 mg ODT twice daily represents a palatable, well-tolerated, and effective antiemetic treatment for the control of cyclophosphamide-induced emesis and nausea and provides equivalent treatment to OT 8 mg twice daily.

Ondansetron suppository: a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group comparison with oral ondansetron for the prevention of cyclophosphamide-induced emesis and nausea. The Ondansetron Suppository emesis study group.

This multinational, multicentre, randomised, parallel-group study compared the safety, tolerability and efficacy of ondansetron 8 mg orally twice a day with ondansetron suppository 16 mg once daily in patients receiving cyclophosphamide-containing chemotherapy. A total of 406 patients were randomised to receive ondansetron 8 mg p.o. (198 patients) or ondansetron suppository (208 patients) medication in a double-blind, double-dummy trial. The primary efficacy analysis revealed that ondansetron provided good anti-emetic control with 81% of patients in the 8 mg p.o. b.d. group and 73% of patients in the 16 mg ondansetron suppository o.d. group experiencing complete or major control of emesis (< or = 2 emetic episodes) on the worst day of days 1-3. The 90% confidence interval for the difference between the two treatments for complete or major control (1.4, 15.0%) showed that the treatments could be regarded as equivalent. A difference in favour of oral ondansetron treatment was noted for the complete control (0 emetic episodes) rates over days 1-3, but no differences were found on day 1. There were no significant differences in the distribution of nausea grades between the treatment groups on the worst day of days 1-3 or on day 1. The incidence of adverse events was similar for the two treatment groups, the most frequently reported events were headache and constipation. There were no significant laboratory findings in either treatment group. In conclusion this study showed that the ondansetron treatments could be regarded as equivalent for the primary efficacy endpoint and that ondansetron suppository was well tolerated and effective in the prevention of cyclophosphamide-induced emesis.

Antiemetic activity of ondansetron in acute gastroenteritis.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism of nausea and vomiting associated with gastroenteritis is unknown. The role of 5-HT3 receptors in emesis associated with gastroenteritis was investigated in paediatric patients. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted in three groups of 12 patients each, receiving either a single i.v. dose of ondansetron (0.3 mg/kg), metoclopramide (0.3 mg/kg) or placebo (sterile saline). Food was restricted and oral rehydration was administered for 4 h. RESULTS: During 0-24 h, the number of emetic episodes experienced was significantly greater (P = 0.048) with placebo (mean = 5) than ondansetron (mean = 2) and the proportion of patients experiencing no emesis was significantly greater (P = 0.039) with ondansetron (58%) than placebo (17%). A numerical difference, in favour of ondansetron, was observed between ondansetron and metoclopramide groups for both of the above parameters. Fewer treatment failures were observed with ondansetron (17%) than placebo (33%) and metoclopramide (42 %). More diarrheal episodes were observed in the groups receiving anti-emetic treatment. All three treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron, a 5HT3 receptor antagonist, was significantly superior to placebo in preventing emesis associated with acute gastroenteritis, in paediatric patients. Therefore, serotonin, acting through 5HT3 receptors, may play a role in this form of emesis.

A multicentre, double-blind study comparing placebo, ondansetron and ondansetron plus dexamethasone for the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis. Ondansetron Delayed Emesis Study Group.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of oral ondansetron, given alone or in combination with dexamethasone in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. A total of 640 chemotherapy-naïve patients received ondansetron 8 mg i.v. and dexamethasone 20 mg i.v. for the control of acute emesis prior to cisplatin (> or = 70 mg/m2) on day 1. Patients who were not rescued or withdrawn on day 1 were to be randomised 24 hours after the start of cisplatin administration to one of four groups; group I placebo oral (p.o.), twice daily (bd) on days 2-6 (n = 125); group II ondansetron (8 mg p.o. bd) on days 2/3 followed by placebo (p.o. bd) on days 4-6 (n = 199); group III ondansetron (8 mg p.o. bd) on days 2-6 (n = 214); group IV ondansetron (8 mg p.o. bd) plus dexamethasone (4 mg p.o. bd) on days 2-6 (n = 66). RESULTS: On day 1, 81% of patients had complete control of acute emesis, with 68% having no emesis and no nausea. Over days 2/3 and over days 2-6, significantly more patients receiving ondansetron plus dexamethasone (group IV) reported no emesis and no nausea (49% and 45%, respectively) compared to ondansetron alone (32% and 27%, respectively) or placebo (group I; 33% and 27%, respectively; P < 0.05 for all pairwise comparisons). There were no significant differences in the control of emesis over days 2/3, where 61% of patients had complete emetic control (0 emetic episodes) with ondansetron plus dexamethasone (group IV), 54% with ondansetron (groups II + III) and 49% with placebo (group I). In the distribution of nausea grades, ondansetron plus dexamethasone (group IV) was significantly superior to ondansetron (groups II + III); P = 0.037) and placebo (group I; P = 0.013) over days 2/3. Over days 2-6 there were no significant differences in the control of emesis, however a comparison of the distribution of nausea grades over days 2-6 showed ondansetron plus dexamethasone (group IV) to be significantly superior to ondansetron (group III; P = 0.043) and placebo (group I; P = 0.024). All treatments were well tolerated and no unexpected drug-related adverse events were reported. There were no differences in the overall incidence of adverse events between the active treatment groups or placebo. Constipation and headache, recognised side effects of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, were the most commonly reported adverse events with the incidence of constipation with ondansetron alone (group III) being significantly greater than with over days 2-6 (14% vs. 6%; P = 0.030). CONCLUSION: In contrast to some previous investigations, in this study, ondansetron alone appears to have a minor role in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis and nausea. In conclusion, the combination of oral ondansetron plus dexamethasone is superior to ondansetron and to placebo.

Ondansetron compared with granisetron in the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced acute emesis: a multicentre double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study. The Ondansetron and Granisetron Emesis Study Group.

This is the first international, multi-centre, double-blind, randomised, parallel group study to directly compare the efficacy and safety profile of a single intravenous dose of ondansetron (8 or 32 mg) with granisetron (3 mg) in the control of cisplatin-induced acute emesis. A total of 496 patients were randomised to receive one of three anti-emetic treatments prior to cisplatin chemotherapy (> or = 50 mg/m2). Of these, 165 and 162 patients received 8 and 32 mg of ondansetron, respectively, and 169 patients received 3 mg of granisetron. Complete control of emesis (0 emetic episodes) over 24 h was reported in 59% of patients in the 8-mg ondansetron group, 51% of patients in the 32-mg ondansetron group and 56% of patients in the granisetron group. Complete or major control (< or = 2 emetic episodes) was achieved in 76 and 74% of patients in the 8- and 32-mg ondansetron group, respectively, compared with 78% of patients in the granisetron group. Nausea graded none or mild 24 h after the start of cisplatin infusion was reported in 71 and 69% of patients in the 8- and 32-mg ondansetron groups, respectively, and in 73% of patients in the granisetron group. There were no significant differences between the treatment groups when global satisfaction scores were compared. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess any interaction between treatments and prognostic factors (age, gender, alcohol use, cisplatin dose or concomitant chemotherapy) on complete or major response, but there was no evidence of interaction for any factor. All three anti-emetic treatments were well tolerated and no severe or unexpected drug-related adverse events were observed with ondansetron or granisetron. Headache, the most reported drug-related adverse event for all three treatment groups, occurred in 9% of all patients. In summary, no significant difference was observed between any of the treatment groups with respect to emesis, nausea or drug-related adverse events.

Investigations into the membrane associated IL-1 like activity on mouse macrophages.

The present study was undertaken to investigate the expression of membrane IL-1 (mIL-1) in mouse macrophages. Membrane IL-1 activity was measured on paraformaldehyde fixed peritoneal macrophages using EL4 6.1 lymphocyte cell line. Acid washing prior to fixation did not remove the mIL-1 activity, indicating that mIL-1 is an integral part of the membrane. Adherence to tissue culture plastic plates was found to be a potent inducer of mIL-1 activity in both resident and C. parvum activated macrophages. Dexamethasone reduced mIL-1 activity induced in vivo by C. parvum and also that induced by adherence in vitro.

Induction of a silica air-pouch granuloma in rat.

An inflammatory reaction was induced by the injection of crystalline silica into a subcutaneous air pouch formed on the dorsa of rats. The degree of inflammation depended on the quantity of silica injected and on the time interval between air pouch formation and silica injection. The silica provoked exudation of fluid, accumulation of polymorphonuclear and mononuclear leucocytes and the formation of a granuloma. These parameters reached peak values by day 4 whilst the serum acute phase protein levels peaked on day 1. Cyclophosphamide, indomethacin and prednisolone inhibited fluid accumulation but only cyclophosphamide inhibited cell infiltration. The increase in wet and dry granuloma weight was suppressed only by steroid treatment. The suitability of this model as a screen for anti-inflammatory compounds is discussed.

Studies on type II collagen induced arthritis in mice.

A consistent and reproducible polyarthritis was induced in mice by immunizing them with type II collagen in Complete Freunds adjuvant (CFA) and Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine. Several inbred strains of mice were investigated for the ability to develop collagen induced arthritis (CIA). DBA/1 mice (H-2q) produced the highest incidence and the most severe arthritis of all the strains examined. Viable BCG vaccine was essential for the induction of a reproducible disease in this strain. The effects of some anti-inflammatory and anti-rheumatic compounds were examined on the developing and established lesions of CIA. These effects were determined by assessing the paw inflammation using a subjective scoring system and measuring foot weight. Furthermore, levels of serum amyloid P component (SAP) were also determined. Benoxaprofen, cyclophosphamide, indomethacin and prednisolone inhibited the paw inflammation in the developing disease whilst the anti-rheumatic compounds auranofin and D-penicillamine exacerbate the paw inflammation. Cyclophosphamide and prednisolone inhibited the established lesions but only prednisolone prevented the development of further lesions in the established disease. The SAP levels in the prednisolone treated group were also reduced. Auranofin treatment exacerbated the inflammation of both the established and the developing lesions in the same animal. D-penicillamine was inactive in the established disease.