Continuous-infusion granisetron compared to ondansetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after high-dose...

The serotonin receptor antagonists effectively prevent emesis with little toxicity when employed with standard doses of emetogenic chemotherapy. The optimal approach to the prevention of the emesis associated with the high doses of chemotherapy used for autologous stem cell transplantation is not known. A randomized controlled trial was designed to assess the relative efficacy and toxicity of granisetron compared to ondansetron in the setting of autologous stem cell transplantation.

A group of 48 patients with breast cancer were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either (1) granisetron as a 0.5-mg i.v. bolus 30 min. before chemotherapy followed by a continuous infusion of 0.04 mg/h (1 mg/day) for 7 days or (2) ondansetron as an 8-mg i.v. bolus 30 min before chemotherapy followed by a continuous infusion of 1 mg/h (24 mg/day) for 7 days. All patients also received 10 mg dexamethasone/day i.v. for 7 days. Chemotherapy consisted of 1500 mg cyclophosphamide per m2/day, 125 mg thiotepa m(-2) day(-1), and 200 mg carboplatin per m2/day all as a continuous infusion for 4 consecutive days. The two study arms were then compared for the incidence and severity of nausea, incidence of emesis, number of salvage anti-emetics required, cost, and toxicity.

A total of 46 patients were evaluable. The treatment arms were well-balanced for known risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Compliance with self-reporting of nausea and vomiting was poor but indicated no difference between the two treatment arms. The average number of anti-emetics required was 15.8 in both treatment arms and the average time to the first dose of a salvage anti-emetic was 2.8 days in the granisetron arm and 2.9 days in the ondansetron arm. The incidence of headache was 36 % in the granisetron arm and 39 % in the ondansetron arm. None of these differences was statistically significant. The use of granisetron resulted in a cost saving of 6.5 %.

There was no significant difference between granisetron and ondansetron in either efficacy or toxicity. At our institution, the use of granisetron resulted in a moderate cost saving.