Should 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonists Be Administered Beyond 24 Hours After Chemotherapy to Prevent Delayed Emesis? Systematic Re-Evaluation of Clinical Evidence and Drug Cost Implications
Top Cited Papers
- 20 February 2005
- journal article
- supportive care-and-quality-of-life
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 23 (6) , 1289-1294
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.04.022
Abstract
Purpose: 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3 antagonists) are effective for preventing acute chemotherapy-induced emesis but the benefits of continuing administration of these agents beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy (delayed emesis) remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to provide estimates of clinical efficacy and drug acquisition cost associated with administering 5-HT3 antagonists beyond 24 hours, as monotherapy or as added to dexamethasone. Methods: This analysis is based on the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative meta-analysis of the efficacy of 5-HT3 antagonists. Results from the clinical trials covered in that meta-analysis were reanalyzed to provide estimates of absolute risk reductions (ARR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) for 5-HT3 antagonists, as monotherapy or as adjunct treatment. Numbers of 5-HT3 antagonist unit doses per successfully treated patient were also calculated. Results: Five studies (comprising 1,716 assessable patients) compared a 5-HT3 antagonist with placebo; five studies (2,240 patients) compared a combination of a 5-HT3 antagonist and dexamethasone with dexamethasone monotherapy. ARR for monotherapy was only 8.2% (95% CI, 3.0% to 13.4%). On average, 74 5-HT3 antagonist doses must be administered to 12 patients (NNT, 12.2; 95% CI, 7.5 to 33.4) not receiving dexamethasone to protect one patient from delayed emesis. In those patients receiving dexamethasone as standard antiemetic treatment in the delayed phase, the addition of a 5-HT3 antagonist did not significantly improve control of delayed emesis as compared with dexamethasone monotherapy (ARR, 2.6%; 95% CI, −0.6% to 5.8%). Conclusion: Neither clinical evidence nor considerations of cost effectiveness justify using 5-HT3 antagonists beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy for prevention of delayed emesis.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Incidence of chemotherapy‐induced nausea and emesis after modern antiemeticsCancer, 2004
- Dexamethasone Alone or in Combination with Ondansetron for the Prevention of Delayed Nausea and Vomiting Induced by ChemotherapyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Recommendations for the Use of Antiemetics: Evidence-Based, Clinical Practice GuidelinesJournal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
- A study evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of tropisetron in combination with dexamethasone in the prevention of delayed platinum-induced nausea and emesisCancer, 1998
- Transferability to clinical practice of the results of controlled clinical trials: The case of antiemetic prophylactic treatment for cancer chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomitingAnnals of Oncology, 1998
- Control of delayed nausea and vomiting with granisetron plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, comparative studyAnnals of Oncology, 1998
- Use of dexamethasone and granisetron in the control of delayed emesis for patients who receive highly emetogenic chemotherapy. National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1998
- The role of the 5-HT3 antagonists ondansetron and dolasetron in the control of delayed onset nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapyAnnals of Oncology, 1997
- A multicentre, double-blind study comparing placebo, ondansetron and ondansetron plus dexamethasone for the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesisAnnals of Oncology, 1996
- Ondansetron Compared with Granisetron in the Prophylaxis of Cyclophosphamide-lnduced Emesis in Out-Patients: A Multicentre, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Randomised, Parallel-Group StudyOncology, 1995