Examination of the correlation of serum metoclopramide levels with antiemetic efficacy in patients receiving cisplatin

Controlling cancer chemotherapy-induced emesis. An update

Cytotoxic chemotherapy can induce acute, delayed and anticipatory nausea and vomiting. The efficacy and toxicity data of the available anti-emetics and their role in chemotherapy-induced emesis are reviewed. Moreover, some pitfalls in the methodology of anti-emetic trials as well as factors known to affect the individual sensitivity of patients for the emetic challenge are illustrated. So far, high-dose metoclopramide (3-6 mg.kg-1.d-1) was the most effective single agent in the control of acute emesis. However, extrapyramidal reactions caused by its dopamine antagonism remained a major drawback. The addition of dexamethasone and/or lorazepam decreases the incidence of extrapyramidal reactions, and further improves anti-emetic control. In animals, serotonin type 3 receptor antagonists have demonstrated promising anti-emetic results against chemotherapy-induced and radiotherapy-induced emesis; the results of clinical studies are awaited. Delayed nausea and vomiting have not been studied as extensively. At present, the combination of metoclopramide and dexamethasone offers an optimal protection in approximately 50% of patients on cisplatin chemotherapy. Anticipatory nausea and emesis remain major problems, and an effective pharmacological treatment is lacking. Attempts to control this type of emesis focus on drugs with amnesic properties and on behaviour therapy.

Correlation of anti-emetic efficacy and plasma levels of ondansetron

Intravenous ondansetron was administered at doses from 0.01 to 0.48 mg/kg every 4 h for three doses to patients receiving cisplatin 60-120 mg/m2 for the first time. Plasma samples were collected from 28 patients at baseline and at suitable times post-dose for pharmacokinetic analysis, and were assayed for ondansetron by high-pressure liquid chromatography. Plasma trough level was defined as the level before the third dose and 4 h area-under-the-curve (AUC4) was calculated with the linear trapezoidal method. Despite wide inter-patient variation, a correlation was seen between both trough level (r = 0.737, P less than 0.0001) and AUC4 (r = 0.903, P less than 0.001) related to dose. Trough level was also predictive of AUC4 (r = 0.824, P less than 0.0001). Frequency of complete protection (no emetic episodes) was equivalent throughout the AUC4 range, suggesting anti-emetic activity even at low AUC4. However, a trend toward better protection against failure (5 or more episodes) was seen when higher values of AUC4 were achieved, suggesting more consistent anti-emetic activity at moderate to high AUC4.