Antiemetic activity of high doses of metoclopramide combined with methylprednisolone versus metoclopramide alone in cisplatin-treated cancer patients: a randomized double-blind trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research.

We designed a multicenter, double-blind randomized study to determine the safety and antiemetic effectiveness of intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone (P) combined with high-dose IV metoclopramide (MTC) v MTC alone in 200 untreated cancer patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy. One hundred eighty-five patients were evaluable for treatment efficacy. MTC plus P was significantly superior to MTC alone in reducing the number and length of vomiting episodes (P = .001 and P = .0008, respectively) and the maximal intensity of nausea (P = .0124 with a score system; P = .0155 with a linear analogue scale) and length of nausea (P = .0056). The subgroup with a major incidence of nausea and vomiting was women, especially young women, outpatients, and those treated with higher doses of cisplatin. Side effects were low and equally distributed between the two treatment groups. We conclude that MTC plus P has greater antiemetic activity than MTC alone in patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy.

Antiemetic activity of two different high doses of metoclopramide in cisplatin-treated cancer patients: a randomized double-blind trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research.

High-dose metoclopramide has been proposed as an effective antiemetic agent in patients treated with cisplatin. Its optimal dosage schedule, however, has not yet been completely defined. We report the results of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial where the efficacy and safety of two fixed high-dose regimens of metoclopramide (60 and 120 mg, respectively) have been tested in 112 patients receiving cisplatin treatment. No statistically significant difference has been found between the two groups. In patients treated with cisplatin at doses greater than 100 mg/m2, the higher dose regimen seems more efficacious, but this result should be confirmed in a larger group of patients. Treatment was generally well-tolerated. However, a consistent percentage of patients (about 60%) still present with vomiting, and this makes further investigation necessary.