Suppr超能文献

预防延迟性恶心:罗彻斯特大学癌症中心社区肿瘤临床方案对接受化疗患者的研究。

Prevention of delayed nausea: a University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program study of patients receiving chemotherapy.

机构信息

University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program Research Base, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep 20;30(27):3389-95. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.39.8123. Epub 2012 Aug 20.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial of the following four regimens for controlling delayed nausea (DN): group 1: palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine on days 2 and 3; group 2: granisetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine on days 2 and 3; group 3: aprepitant + palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with aprepitant + dexamethasone on days 2 and 3; and group 4: palonosetron + dexamethasone on day 1 with prochlorperazine + dexamethasone on days 2 and 3.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients received doxorubicin, epirubicin, cisplatin, carboplatin, or oxaliplatin. The primary end point was average nausea assessed four times daily on days 2 and 3. Primary analyses were whether nausea control would be improved by using palonosetron versus granisetron on day 1 (group 1 v group 2); by adding dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 (group 1 v group 4); and by using aprepitant versus prochlorperazine (group 3 v group 4). Statistical significance was set at P = .017.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-four, 234, 241, and 235 evaluable patients were accrued to groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Adjusted mean differences for the three planned analyses were as follows: palonosetron versus granisetron: -0.01 (95% CI, -0.23 to 0.20; P = .72); adding dexamethasone on days 2 and 3: 0.20 (95% CI, -0.02 to 0.41; P = .01); and using aprepitant versus prochlorperazine: -0.03 (95% CI, -0.24 to 0.19; P = .56).

CONCLUSION

The addition of dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 reduced DN. Palonosetron and granisetron have similar effects on DN. The beneficial effect of adding aprepitant for control of DN was the same as adding prochlorperazine.

摘要

目的

我们进行了一项双盲随机临床试验,以比较以下四种方案控制迟发性恶心(DN)的效果:第 1 组:帕洛诺司琼+地塞米松在第 1 天,第 2 和第 3 天用丙氯拉嗪;第 2 组:格拉司琼+地塞米松在第 1 天,第 2 和第 3 天用丙氯拉嗪;第 3 组:阿瑞匹坦+帕洛诺司琼+地塞米松在第 1 天,第 2 和第 3 天用阿瑞匹坦+地塞米松;第 4 组:帕洛诺司琼+地塞米松在第 1 天,第 2 和第 3 天用丙氯拉嗪+地塞米松。

患者和方法

化疗初治患者接受多柔比星、表柔比星、顺铂、卡铂或奥沙利铂治疗。主要终点为第 2 和第 3 天每天 4 次评估的平均恶心程度。主要分析包括:第 1 天使用帕洛诺司琼与格拉司琼(第 1 组与第 2 组)、第 2 和第 3 天加用地塞米松(第 1 组与第 4 组)、以及使用阿瑞匹坦与丙氯拉嗪(第 3 组与第 4 组)是否会改善恶心控制。统计显著性设为 P =.017。

结果

分别有 234、234、241 和 235 例可评估患者入组第 1、2、3 和 4 组。三个计划分析的调整平均差异如下:帕洛诺司琼与格拉司琼:-0.01(95%置信区间,-0.23 至 0.20;P =.72);第 2 和第 3 天加用地塞米松:0.20(95%置信区间,-0.02 至 0.41;P =.01);以及使用阿瑞匹坦与丙氯拉嗪:-0.03(95%置信区间,-0.24 至 0.19;P =.56)。

结论

第 2 和第 3 天加用地塞米松可减少 DN。帕洛诺司琼和格拉司琼对 DN 的作用相似。加用地塞米松与加用丙氯拉嗪对控制 DN 的有益效果相同。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

7
Insight in the prediction of chemotherapy-induced nausea.化疗引起的恶心预测的新视角。
Support Care Cancer. 2010 Jul;18(7):869-76. doi: 10.1007/s00520-009-0723-2. Epub 2009 Aug 23.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验