There is still controversy as to what constitutes the optimal therapy for acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced emesis and nausea. We conducted a three-armed randomized multi-centre study in 193 chemotherapy-naive patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy inducing both acute and delayed symptoms (cisplatin > or = 50 mg/m2, carboplatin > or = 300 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide > or = 750 mg/m2, ifosfamide > or = 1.5 g/m2 on day 1). Group A: 1 x 5 mg tropisetron i.v. on day 1 + 2, then 10 mg p.o. (oral dose now recommended: 5 mg); group B: tropisetron as for A+dexamethasone, 20 mg i.v., on days 1 + 2, then 4 mg i.v./p.o.; group C: tropisetron as for A+metoclopramide, 20 mg i.v. +2 x 10 mg p.o. on day 1, then 3 x 10 mg p.o. Treatment was continued for at least 2 days after the end of chemotherapy. Tropisetron+dexamethasone was significantly superior to tropisetron alone both for acute (P = 0.0064) and delayed (P = 0.0053) emesis. Complete control of acute and delayed emesis (nausea) was achieved in 80% (75%) and 53% (46%) in group A, 97% (90%) and 80% (58%) in group B, and 86% (80%) and 49% (45%) in group C. Patients completely asymptomatic during the whole cycle accounted for 26% of those in group A, 49% in group B and 28% in group C. The most frequent adverse events were constipation (16.6%), headache (7.3%) and tiredness (7.3%). Once-daily tropisetron+dexamethasone over several days is well tolerated and is a simple means of achieving further significant improvement in the efficacy of tropisetron against acute and delayed symptoms.

All-trans-retinoic acid induces complete remission in acute promyelocytic leukemia. However, it is not clear whether induction therapy with all-trans-retinoic acid is superior to chemotherapy alone or whether maintenance treatment with all-trans-retinoic acid improves outcome.

To confirm the efficacy of docetaxel in patients with breast cancer previously treated with one chemotherapy regimen for advanced or metastatic disease and to compare the incidence of fluid retention (FR) and skin toxicity when docetaxel is administered with and without prophylactic corticosteroids.

A double-blind study was conducted in 10 healthy men to investigate serum beta-carotene and lycopene responses after ingestion of individual and combined doses of beta-carotene (BC) and lycopene. On each dosing day, a baseline blood sample was drawn, followed by an oral dose of 0.11 mmol (60 mg) of either all-trans BC or all-trans lycopene or by a combined oral dose of 0.11 mmol each. Subjects were tested with each of the three doses. The dose type was randomized. Blood (10 mL) was drawn at 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12 and 24 h after dosing. At 2 and 4 wk after the first dose, the protocol was repeated with the other doses. After ingestion of the BC dose, serum BC concentrations significantly decreased from baseline at 1 and 3 h followed by a continuous increase from baseline that was significant at 12 and 24 h (P < 0.01). Serum lycopene concentrations significantly increased from baseline at 5 h after the lycopene dose (P < 0.008) and returned to baseline thereafter. Ingestion of a combined dose of BC and lycopene resulted in a significant increase in serum concentrations of both BC and lycopene at 24 h (P < 0.05). The 24-h area under the curve (AUC) for BC was not different when BC was ingested alone or with lycopene, whereas the 24-h AUC for lycopene was significantly greater when lycopene was ingested with BC than when ingested alone (P < 0.05). Our data suggest that ingestion of a combined dose of BC and lycopene has little effect on the absorption of BC but improves that of lycopene in men.

In the pharmacokinetic evaluation of a single doxorubicin dose calculated by body surface area (25 mg/m2) or body weight (1 mg/kg body weight) and given intravenously as a 10-, 15-, or 20-minute infusion, the rate of doxorubicin infusion (mg per minute per m2 or mg per minute per kg) correlated positively with clearance and the distribution rate constant alpha, and it inversely correlated with area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC). These findings suggest that a slower infusion rate results in a greater AUC and longer distribution phase than a faster infusion rate and indicates the importance of normalizing dosage regimes by infusion rate rather than by infusion duration when considering dose-response phenomena in veterinary patients.

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.

This nonblinded, multicenter, randomized phase III study compares the median time to progression (primary endpoint), response rate, and quality of life, safety, and survival of docetaxel (Taxotere) vs mitomycin (Mutamycin) plus vinblastine (Velban) in patients with metastatic breast cancer in whom previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy has failed. Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of either 100 mg/m2 of docetaxel for 1 hour every 3 weeks, or 12 mg/m2 of mitomycin every 6 weeks plus 6 mg/m2 of vinblastine every 3 weeks. This preliminary analysis presents data on 200 patients among 392 patients recruited. Median time to progression was longer in the group treated with docetaxel compared with the mitomycin/vinblastine group (17 vs 9 weeks). The overall response rates were higher with docetaxel (28% vs 13%, respectively), and fewer patients in the docetaxel group had progressive disease as their best overall response (29% vs 48%). As expected, thrombocytopenia was more common in the mitomycin/vinblastine group, and neutropenia occurred more frequently in the docetaxel group. Severe fluid retention in the docetaxel group (8.7%) resulted in treatment discontinuation in 5 patients (5%). Severe thrombocytopenia (12%) and constipation (6%) led to treatment discontinuation in 7 and 3 patients, respectively, in the mitomycin/vinblastine group. Based on this preliminary analysis, docetaxel appears to be equally as safe as and more active than mitomycin/ vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer in whom previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy has failed. These results are subject to cautious interpretation because this analysis was conducted on the first 200 patients who finished the study treatments, and these preliminary results may underestimate response and overstate treatment discontinuation rates. Thus, the final analysis on the entire patient population is necessary to confirm these preliminary findings.

Single-agent docetaxel (Taxotere) has been shown to be highly active in metastatic breast cancer, with an overall response rate of 47%, median time to progression of 4 months, and survival of 10 months when administered as second-line therapy. These data compare favorably with those reported for doxorubicin (Adriamycin), which has been considered the most active single agent in this setting. This nonblinded, multicenter, randomized phase III study compared the median time to progression, response rate, quality of life, toxicity, and survival after treatment with docetaxel or doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer in whom previous alkylating chemotherapy failed. Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of either docetaxel, 100 mg/m2, for 1 hour once every 3 weeks or doxorubicin, 75 mg/m2, for 15 to 20 minutes once every 3 weeks. This preliminary analysis presents data on 200 of 326 patients recruited. It was performed after the completion of patient accrual. The median time to progression was greater in the docetaxel group than in the doxorubicin group (29 vs 21 weeks, respectively; P = not significant). Overall response rates were higher with docetaxel (47% vs 27%), and fewer patients in the docetaxel group had progressive disease as their best overall response (10% vs 22%). Both regimens caused the same incidence and severity of neutropenia, yet patients treated with doxorubicin had a higher incidence of infection and febrile neutropenia. In addition, doxorubicin produced a higher incidence of grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia. Cardiac toxicity led to discontinuation in 7 patients and death in 2 patients in the doxorubicin group; fluid retention led to discontinuation in 1 patient in the docetaxel group. Based on this preliminary analysis, docetaxel was more active and safer than doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer in whom previous alkylating chemotherapy failed.

This multicentre randomized single-blind parallel group study compared the efficacy of oral ondansetron plus methylprednisolone (OND+MPS) with conventional antiemetic strategies (TH) over 4 consecutive courses in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. This study was conducted in naive patients receiving a minimum of 3 cytotoxics including adriamycin (> or = 35 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (> or = 500 mg/m2) plus an other alkylating agent. Of the 364 patients included in the study, 70% had a breast cancer and 30% a lymphoma. Patients were divided into two groups. On day 1, one group of patients received OND (8 mg, po) 2 hours before chemotherapy, followed by a slow intravenous injection of MPS (120 mg) 30 minutes before chemotherapy. Eight hours after the start of chemotherapy, patients received OND (8 mg, po) and MPS (16 mg, po). On days 2-4, patients received OND (8 mg, po) and MPS (16 mg, po) twice daily. The second group of patients received conventional antiemetic treatment (benzamide plus corticosteroids with or without benzodiazepins). The primary efficacy parameter was defined as complete control of emesis (0 emetic episodes) over 4 consecutive courses of chemotherapy. In the OND+MPS group, 63% of patients experienced complete control of emesis versus 33% in the TH group (p < 0.001). The secondary parameters (percentage of days with no emetic episodes, control of emetic episodes, grade of nausea at each course, patient preference and quality of life evaluation) were always significantly better in the OND+MPS treated group. The percentage of days without any emetic episode over the 4 courses of chemotherapy was 91% in the OND+MPS group and 75% in the TH group (p < 0.001). Ninety-two percent of patients from OND+MPS group preferred to continue their treatment versus 76% in the TH group (p < 0.001). Concerning the quality of life assessed by FLIC and FLIE questionnaires, the analysis showed a significant difference at the end of the treatment in favor of OND+MPS (p = 0.037 and 0.0075 respectively). This study showed the interest in using the combination OND+MPS right from the first course of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy.

ACR-CH, which consists of aclarubicin (ACR) adsorbed onto activated carbon particles, was developed for locoregional chemotherapy for breast cancer. Thirty patients with breast cancer received an ACR (10 mg) injection intra- and peri-tumorally, either as ACR-CH or as ACR aqueous solution (ACR-AQ) 5 min before the operation for breast cancer. The ACR concentrations were significantly higher in the peritumoral regions and regional lymph nodes, and were also significantly lower in the blood plasma in patients given ACR-CH versus patients given ACR-AQ.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether a 1-month regimen of postoperative radiotherapy combined with 5-fluorouracil could reduce the local recurrence rate and improve survival in patients with Dukes B and C rectal cancer.

We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tetrachlorodecaoxide (TCDO) in patients with chemotherapy-induced mucositis. Sixty-two patients with World Health Organization grade II-IV oral mucositis were eligible for the study. They were randomized to receive TCDO or placebo, 10 ml, twice daily, swish and swallow, for 7 days. Patients were evaluated for oral pain, dysphagia, and oral intake. Downgrading and total duration of mucositis were documented. Thirty-two were randomized to receive TCDO. Thirty received the placebo. All were evaluable. Both arms were well matched for age, gender, type of underlying neoplasm, and prior history of oral mucositis. Intensity of initial symptoms, degree of mucositis, and time period between delivery of chemotherapy and development of mucositis were also similar. Post-therapy evaluation revealed no significant difference in the mean grade of oral and esophageal pain, or dysphagia between TCDO and placebo. Downgrading or total duration of mucositis did not differ between the two groups. Oral intake improved significantly in patients taking TCDO. Time to subjective improvement in oral pain was significantly shorter with TCDO (3.1 versus 3.6 days). Evaluation on day 3 revealed that 77% of those receiving TCDO were free of oral pain in comparison to 46% receiving placebo (P = 0.05). These results indicate that TCDO may be helpful in palliating some of the symptoms related to oral mucositis. The therapeutic benefit, however, is small and needs to be confirmed in a larger trial.

To establish the long-term, dose-response relationship between the concentration of and duration of exposure to mitomycin to a decrease in intraocular pressure (IOP) and fewer complications.

We conducted a randomized, prospective trial comparing external irradiation with external irradiation plus goserelin (an agonist analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone that reduces testosterone secretion) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

Shivering is experienced by up to 70% of patients undergoing amphotericin B therapy. Treatment with meperidine hydrochloride, currently the most widely used medication for controlling amphotericin B-induced shivering, was compared with nefopam hydrochloride, which has been successfully used to treat post-operative shivering.

Treatment with interferon prolongs survival in chronic myelogenous leukemia. We conducted a clinical trial to assess the efficacy of treatment with a combination of interferon and cytarabine.

We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial to compare preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone in patients with stage I and II squamous-cell cancer of the esophagus.

To examine the accumulation of anticancer drugs in tumor tissues by different routes of administration.

Based on preclinical and clinical studies which suggested that amifostine can protect against haematological toxicity of cyclophosphamide, we conducted a clinical trial of amifostine and intermediate doses of cyclophosphamide in patients with high-risk malignant lymphoma. 40 patients were enrolled to receive amifostine (910 mg/m2) before cyclophosphamide (1500 mg/m2) for two cycles (10 patients); 20 patients were allocated to receive amifostine/cyclophosphamide only on one cycle (patients were their own control) and 10 patients received cyclophosphamide alone without amifostine protection. Patients who received amifostine had fewer days of severe granulocytopenia (grade III or IV) and infectious episodes, and delay on treatment was minimal. Amifostine was well tolerated; only 2 patients developed transient and mild hypotension. The complete response rate was 72% (29/40). We conclude that amifostine is a good protector against haematological toxicity of cyclophosphamide and did not interfere with tumour response. Clinical trials with increasing doses of cytotoxic drugs or combination chemotherapy are needed to define the role of this myeloprotector agent in the treatment of patients with malignant lymphoma.