A double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging safety evaluation of single-dose intravenous dolasetron in healthy male volunteers

Comparative Pharmacology and Guide to the Use of the Serotonin 5-HT3 Receptor Antagonists for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

Since the introduction of the serotonin 5-hydroxy tryptamine 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists in the early 1990s, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and post-discharge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) has decreased, yet continues to be a problem for the surgical patient. The clinical application of the 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists has helped define the approach and role of these antiemetics in the prevention and treatment of PONV and PDNV. Pharmacological and clinical differences exist among these medications resulting in corresponding differences in effectiveness, safety, optimal dosage, time of administration, and use as combination and rescue antiemetic therapy. The clinical application of the 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist antiemetics has improved the prevention and treatment of PONV and PDNV. The most recent consensus guidelines for PONV published in 2014 outline the use of these antiemetics. The 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists play an important role to help prevent PONV and PDNV in perioperative care pathways such as Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS). Comparisons and guidelines for use of the 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists in relation to the risk for PONV and PDNV are reviewed.

Reappraisal of the role of dolasetron in prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with surgery or chemotherapy

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and postoperative nausea and vomiting are one of the most frequent but also very concerning consequences for patients undergoing chemotherapy or surgical procedures under general anesthesia. There are a variety of mechanisms involved in the activation of nausea and vomiting. Serotonin, a ubiquitous central and peripheral neurotransmitter, is thought to be the predominant mediator of the perception of nausea and triggering of the vomiting response in both the brain and the periphery via the 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT₃) receptor pathways. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists disrupt this pathway, largely at the level of the vagal afferent pathways, to decrease nausea and vomiting. This review will focus on dolasetron, an older but sill commonly used 5-HT₃ receptor antagonist and its multimodal mechanism of action, safety and tolerability, patient considerations, and a review of the current literature on its use to combat both chemotherapy-induced and postoperative nausea and vomiting in these two important patient populations.

Acute effect of palonosetron on electrocardiographic parameters in cancer patients: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Palonosetron is a novel 5-hydroxytryptamine(3) (5 HT(3)) receptor antagonist, which has been shown to be superior to first generation 5 HT(3) receptor antagonists regarding the prevention of acute, delayed and overall chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. First generation 5 HT(3) receptor antagonists may induce electrocardiographic changes of heart rate and repolarization. The acute cardiac effect of palonosteron is unknown. The purpose of this study is to determine acute effects of palonosetron on electrocardiographic (ECG) parameters in cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study had a prospective design. Seventy-six cancer patients with normal cardiac function who received palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting were enrolled. Standard 12-lead ECG recordings were performed at baseline and 30 min after palonosetron administration. P wave durations and corrected QT intervals were measured; P wave dispersion (Pd) and QTc dispersion were calculated.

RESULTS

Median heart rate did not differ among 76 patients enrolled before and after palonosetron administration (p: 0.6). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were not significantly different before and after palonosteron (p values 0.9 and 0.3, respectively). Although median QT min value was higher after palonosetron administration than before palonosetron administration, the difference was not statistically significant (p: 0.6).

CONCLUSION

Palonosetron seems to have no acute arrhythmogenic potential.

Electrocardiographic findings of palonosetron in cancer patients

PURPOSE

Nausea and vomiting are among the major problems occurring during and after the chemotherapy treatments of cancer patients. The recently developed 5-HT(3) antagonists have proved much more effective than former agents. Several studies have shown that these agents cause certain ECG changes. We aimed to evaluate the ECG changes caused by palonosetron, one of the new 5-HT(3) antagonists.

METHODS

Our study includes a total of 50 patients diagnosed with solid-organ tumors receiving chemotherapy. The patients were applied 12-lead ECG before palonosetron infusion. Afterwards, subsequent ECGs were applied on the 30th, 60th, and 90th minutes following the infusion of palonosetron. Arterial blood pressure was measured before and after the infusion. PR, QRS, QT, QTmax, QTmin, QTd, Pmax, Pmin, Pd, QTc, QTcmax, QTcmin, and QTcd values were evaluated for each ECG.

RESULTS

We did not detect significant correlations between the systolic and diastolic blood pressures before and after (30 min) palonosetron infusion (p > 0.05). However, there was a statistically significant decrease in heart rate (p = 0.000). The evaluation of ECG findings revealed that there was a significant prolongation in PR distance, as shown by the comparisons of 0 min with 30, 60, and 90 min. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in QRS, QT, QTmax, QTmin, QTd, Pmax, Pmin, Pd, QTc, QTcmax, QTcmin, and QTcd values (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this study, we revealed that palonosetron did not cause any severe rhythmic disorders or symptomatic ECG changes. We concluded that it could be safe to administer palonosetron antiemetically.

Prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting: controversies in the use of serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype 3 receptor antagonists

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) continues to be a "big little problem" despite recent advances in anesthesia. Because of an increased interest in, and the abundant publications on this topic, guidelines for the management of PONV were published in 2003. Several key but controversial issues regarding PONV prophylaxis were left unaddressed, however. These included whether clinical differences exist between the 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, concern over optimal dosage and timing of administration, optimal 5-HT3 receptor antagonist combination therapy, and whether rescue therapy is effective after prior administration of the same or a different 5-HT3 receptor antagonist. The application of these antiemetics in clinical practice has raised questions regarding the role of the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in the treatment of postdischarge nausea and vomiting and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. A brief overview of the incidence, risk factors and current management recommendations for PONV and current controversies with special emphasis on the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, is discussed.

An evaluation of potential signals for ventricular arrhythmia and cardiac arrest with dolasetron, ondansetron, and granisetron in the fda combined spontaneous reporting system/adverse event reporting system

BACKGROUND

Of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3)-receptor antagonists, dolasetron, ondan-setron, granisetron, and palonosetron, only dolasetron and palonosetron have a precaution in their FDA labeling concerning corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation. At FDA approved doses, QTc prolongation has been observed in clinical trials with some 5-HT3 receptor antagonists (however, palonosetron has been only recently approved, with few published clinical data available). However, due to patient exclusion criteria, such trials with 5-HT3 receptor antagonists may have failed to examine the risk of these agents in "real world" patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to assess the potential risk for selected cardiac adverse events associated with dolasetron, ondansetron, and granisetron use.

METHODS

The FDA combined Spontaneous Reporting System/Adverse Event Reporting System database was analyzed. The process of analyzing such a database for early warnings of potential hazards is known as signal generation. The statistical technique proportional reporting ratio (PRR) was used to aid detection of a potential signal within the database. PRR is the observed proportion of a given adverse event for the drug of interest (the number of events of interest for the drug divided by the total number of reports for the drug) divided by the expected proportion. Through the third quarter of 2002, the database was searched using the preferred term electrocardiogram qt corrected interval prolonged.

RESULTS

One, 3, and 0 cases were reported for dolasetron, ondansetron, andgranisetron, respectively. The number of cases did not satisfy 1 of the 3 criteria we utilized to define a potential signal, the 3 criteria being: 3 or more reported cases of the adverse event, a PRR value of at least 2, and a χ(2) value of >4. As this term may be unlikely to be reported, the database was also searched using the term ventricular arrhythmias and cardiac arrest. The PRR, used as a parameter to detect a potential signal within the database, was 3.23, 1.31, and 1.13 for dolasetron, ondansetron, and granisetron, respectively. The number of observed ventricular arrhythmias and cardiac arrests was ∼3-fold higher with dolasetron compared with the expected value (calculated by dividing the individual agent's total number of events reported by the proportion of adverse events for all agents combined). The results for dolasetron fulfilled the criteria we used to define a potential signal.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis detected a potential signal for ventricular arrhythmiasand cardiac arrest with dolasetron, but not with ondansetron or granisetron. However, there are limitations of a PRR analysis, which include only measuring cases that have been reported, providing relative frequencies instead of actual rates, and not providing information on the severity of adverse events or causal relationships. In addition, our analysis does not include consideration of concomitant medications, and only 2 search terms were used. Errors in identifying potential signals may also include confounding factors, such as the underlying disease, potential confusion with reporting under trade and generic names, and potential multiple reporting of the same case.

Optimising antiemetic therapy: what are the problems and how can they be overcome?

BACKGROUND

Management of chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-induced emesis has improved significantly following the introduction of the 5-HT3-receptor antagonists. Prophylactic use of these agents is recommended for the prevention of both chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, given with a corticosteroid. Despite these advances, nausea and vomiting remain among the most feared and debilitating adverse effects of cytotoxic therapy. The shift towards a more elderly population of patients with cancer presents additional considerations for supportive care, with an emphasis on achieving control of nausea and vomiting, whilst minimising toxicity and avoiding drug-drug interactions. This review presents some of the key issues for consideration in optimising antiemetic therapy. The PubMed search engine was used to search for relevant literature (up to December 2004) and relevant international congress materials collected during 2003 and 2004.

SCOPE

While the early stages of nausea and vomiting are 5-HT-mediated, identification of a role for substance P in late emesis has led to the development of the NK1-receptor antagonist, aprepitant. As a new agent, the clinical profile of aprepitant is still being explored, including its interaction with concomitant medications. Patients who achieve good control of acute and late-acute nausea and vomiting have a reduced risk of experiencing delayed onset symptoms, emphasising the importance of prophylactic management with effective agents. Although the 5-HT3-receptor antagonists are widely considered to have equivalent efficacy, they vary in half-life and the nature of antagonism at receptors. Their metabolic profiles also differ, with cytochrome P450 (CYP) metabolism affecting their propensity for drug-drug interactions. Several sets of guidelines are available that outline recommendations for selection and use of antiemetic therapy. However, under-use of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists has been reported in both the radiotherapy and chemotherapy settings, and some commonly used doses may be suboptimal.

CONCLUSION

In optimising antiemetic therapy, wider implementation of guidelines is desirable, as is consideration of each patient's individual needs. Safety and tolerability of supportive care medications should be a key consideration, and cardiovascular warnings and the possibility of drug-drug interactions should be given sufficient consideration, particularly in view of the older age of the population with cancer.

Selective serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for postoperative nausea and vomiting: are they all the same?

Selective serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists have proven safe and effective for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Dolasetron, granisetron, ondansetron and tropisetron selectively and competitively bind to 5-HT(3) receptors, blocking serotonin binding at vagal afferents in the gut and in the regions of the CNS involved in emesis, including the chemoreceptor trigger zone and the nucleus tractus solitarii. Despite their shared mechanism of action, 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists have different chemical structures and exhibit differences in receptor binding affinity, dose response and duration of effect. Furthermore, although dolasetron, granisetron, ondansetron and tropisetron are all extensively metabolised by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) system, different components of this system predominate in the metabolism of each of these agents. Hence, although these agents are considered equally effective in the overall population, their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences may explain the variability in individual responses to these drugs. This review discusses the pharmacological profiles of dolasetron, granisetron, ondansetron and tropisetron, and the clinical implications of differences in their profiles.

Coronary vasospasm leading to an acute myocardial infarction after the administration of dolasetron

The 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonists are commonly used agents for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, these drugs can have significant cardiovascular adverse effects. We report a case of acute myocardial infarction after administration of dolasetron in a 17-year-old adolescent girl during strabismus corrective surgery.

Electrocardiographic and cardiovascular effects of the 5-hydroxytryptamine3 receptor antagonists

OBJECTIVE

To review the electrocardiographic (ECG) and cardiovascular effects of 5-hydroxytryptamine(3) (5-HT(3)) receptor antagonists preclinically, in healthy volunteers, and in patients undergoing chemotherapy or surgery.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search was performed of clinical trials and preclinical data published between 1963 and December 2002 assessing the ECG and cardiovascular effects of 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists, supplemented with reviews and secondary sources.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All of the articles identified were evaluated and all information deemed relevant was included in this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

There are no clinically relevant differences in efficacy and safety among the available 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced and postoperative nausea and vomiting. As a class, they have well-defined electrophysiologic activity. Changes in ECG parameters (PR, QRS, QT, QTc, JT intervals) are small, reversible, clinically insignificant, and independent of the patient population studied, and patients are asymptomatic during these changes. ECG changes are most prominent 1-2 hours after a dose of dolasetron, ondansetron, and granisetron and return to baseline within 24 hours. Clinically important adverse cardiovascular events associated with these changes are rare. No serious cardiac events (including torsade de pointes) arising from ECG interval changes have been attributed to 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist use.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical data demonstrate that ECG interval changes are a class effect of the 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists. Theoretical concern regarding cardiovascular adverse events with these agents is not supported by clinical experience. The significant benefits of these agents outweigh the theoretical small risk of meaningful cardiovascular events.

Benefits and risks of newer treatments for chemotherapy-induced and postoperative nausea and vomiting

Nausea and vomiting are common adverse effects of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, anaesthesia and surgery. The incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is estimated to vary from 30 to 90%, depending on the type of chemotherapeutic agent used. Radiation-induced emesis varies with anatomical site radiated but is estimated to have an overall incidence of approximately 40%. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) depends on the type of anaesthesia and surgery, but overall is estimated to be 20-30%. Evidence-based medicine and meta-analysis have been used to direct medical therapy to help determine equivalence, optimal dose, timing, safety and efficacy of antiemetic medications. Concepts such as the number needed to treat and number needed to harm are helpful to guide the clinician regarding the benefits and risks of a particular treatment. The serotonin 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists ondansetron, granisetron, tropisetron and dolasetron have been important additions to the antiemetic armamentarium. The 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists are similar in chemical structure, efficacy and adverse effect profile. They appear to have no important differences among themselves in clinical outcomes for CINV and PONV. Headache, dizziness, constipation and diarrhoea are their most common adverse effects, and when they occur they are usually mild and easily managed. Haemodynamic changes and extrapyramidal adverse effects are uncommon. ECG changes such as prolonged corrected QT (QTc) interval are infrequent, dose-related and overall judged to be clinically insignificant. As most studies with the 5-HT(3) antagonists have been conducted on relatively healthy patients, caution should be exercised when these drugs are used in susceptible patients with co-morbidities. The clinician must weigh the benefit of administering an antiemetic for CINV or PONV against the risk of occurrence of an adverse event.

5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists for the treatment of nausea and vomiting: a reappraisal of their side-effect profile

Nausea and vomiting can cause considerable distress and discomfort to patients undergoing chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery. Several classes of antiemetic agents exist to combat these side effects, though the 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists have become the first-line treatment choice for many cancer patients and are considered the "gold standard" in antiemetic therapy. Compared with the older generation antiemetic drugs, 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonists are effective, well tolerated, and associated with few side effects. However, emerging differences among these agents suggest that the incidence and/or intensity of adverse events should not be regarded as a class effect. The side-effect profile of any supportive care therapy is particularly important in certain subgroups of patients, including pediatric patients and the elderly, as well as those suffering comorbid conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and renal or hepatic impairment. Indeed, dolasetron is associated with cardiovascular effects, and thus, should be used with extreme caution in patients who suffer from or may develop prolongation of cardiac conduction intervals. Ondansetron, on the other hand, is associated with a greater incidence of central nervous system side effects than either dolasetron or ondansetron, and pharmacokinetic parameters are affected in patients with hepatic impairment, thereby requiring dose adjustments. Clinicians are encouraged to evaluate patients on an individual basis when choosing which 5-HT(3)-receptor antagonist to prescribe.

The cardiotoxic potential of the 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist antiemetics: is there cause for concern?

PURPOSE

To review and evaluate the potential cardiac effects of 5-HT(3) antiemetic treatment in patients who may be predisposed to cardiac complications resulting from malignancy, cytotoxic oncologic regimens, or preexisting comorbid conditions.

DESIGN

A literature review was conducted on the negative cardiovascular effects of chemotherapeutic agents, and, more specifically, on the cardiac interactions of the 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists commonly used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

RESULTS

Clinical studies in healthy subjects have reported electrocardiograph changes following administration of 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists. However, there are limited data on the use of 5-HT(3) antiemetics when administered with cardiotoxic chemotherapy. Nonetheless, the development of significant electrocardiograph changes with some agents may indicate a potential for significant cardiac effects in patients, particularly those who may be predisposed to cardiac complication.

CONCLUSIONS

As the predicted human life span increases, clinicians will be treating a larger, older oncology population. Because two of the most common major comorbidities are cardiovascular related, we need to be acutely aware of the toxic effects of chemotherapy, as well as the possible cardiac interaction of supportive agents, specifically the 5-HT(3) antiemetics. Until more data are made available, the best antiemetic option for patients receiving emetogenic and cardiotoxic chemotherapy may be the agent with the fewest apparent cardiac effects.

Effect of infusion rate on the pharmacokinetics and tolerance of intravenous dolasetron mesylate

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics of dolasetron mesylate and its active metabolite hydrodolasetron when dolasetron mesylate was administered intravenously at increasing infusion rates.

DESIGN

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study.

METHODS

Forty-nine healthy nonsmoking male volunteers were randomly assigned to receive intravenous doses of dolasetron mesylate 100 mg or placebo. Three groups of 16 subjects each (12 dolasetron mesylate, 4 placebo) received escalating infusion rates (50, 100, then 200 mg/min). Physical examinations, vital signs, laboratory tests, and adverse events were recorded before and after administration of the study drug. Serial blood samples and 12-lead electrocardiogram measurements were obtained for 24 hours after the infusion. Plasma samples were analyzed for dolasetron and hydrodolasetron.

RESULTS

Dolasetron mesylate was well tolerated, with no apparent differences in vital signs or adverse event profiles among the different rates of infusion. In general, the pharmacokinetics of dolasetron and hydrodolasetron were superimposable among the three infusion rate groups. Plasma dolasetron concentrations declined rapidly in all three infusion rate groups, with mean elimination half-life (t1/2) of less than 10 minutes. The reduced metabolite hydrodolasetron, which accounts for most pharmacologic activity, formed rapidly, with maximum concentrations occurring between 0.4 and 0.5 hours and disappeared with a mean t1/2 of 8-9 hours. The correlation coefficients of least-squares regression analysis between the pharmacokinetic parameters and the infusion rate of dolasetron were less than 0.083 and the slopes were not significantly different from 0, suggesting that none of the hydrodolasetron pharmacokinetic parameters were affected by rate of infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The intravenous administration of dolasetron 100 mg over 0.5-2 minutes did not significantly alter the pharmacokinetic profiles of either dolasetron or hydrodolasetron. In addition, the safety profile of dolasetron did not change with increasing rate of infusion. Therefore, the rate of infusion of dolasetron mesylate appears to have no pharmacokinetic or clinical implications when assessed over a 0.5-2-minute time period.

Prophylactic oral dolasetron mesylate reduces nausea and vomiting after abdominal hysterectomy. The Canadian Dolasetron Study Group

PURPOSE

The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) varies from 50% to 75% after gynaecological surgery under general anaesthesia. This study evaluates the dose-response relationships, safety, and efficacy of the new 5-HT3 antagonist, dolasetron mesylate, in the prevention of PONV in women undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH).

METHODS

Three hundred and seventy four women scheduled for TAH under general anaesthesia were studied at 13 Canadian centres. Patients received in a randomized, double-blind manner 25, 50, 100, or 200 mg dolasetron or placebo po one to two hours before induction of anaesthesia. The anesthetic protocol was standardized. Efficacy was evaluated for 24 hr after surgery by comparing the number of emetic episodes, administration of rescue medication, severity of nausea, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Analysis of complete response (no emetic episodes and no rescue for 24 hr) revealed a linear dose-response relationship across dolasetron groups (P < 0.002). Dolasetron 100 mg (P < 0.003) and 200 mg (P < 0.01) were superior to placebo. The percentage of patients with no emetic episodes increased from 29.3% (placebo) to 54.1 % (100 mg). Subgroup analysis revealed ASA status (I > II), previous history of PONV, previous history of motion sickness, and total morphine dose (> 55 mg associated with less PONV than < 55 mg) influenced the incidence of emetic symptoms, but did not alter the results of the primary analysis.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic dolasetron (100 mg and 200 mg) reduces the incidence of PONV in patients having total abdominal hysterectomy.

Treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting with single intravenous doses of dolasetron mesylate: a multicenter trial. Dolasetron Mesylate PONV Treatment Study Group

This study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of four intravenous (I.V.) doses of dolasetron, an investigational 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, for the treatment of postoperative nausea and/or vomiting (PONV) after outpatient surgery under general anesthesia. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial compared the antiemetic efficacy of 12.5, 25, 50, or 100 mg I.V. dolasetron with placebo over 24 h using complete response (no emetic episodes and no rescue medication), time to first emetic episode or rescue medication, and patient nausea and satisfaction with antiemetic therapy as rated by visual analog scale (VAS). Of 1557 patients enrolled, 620 patients were eligible for treatment. Complete response rates for all dolasetron doses--12.5 mg (35%), 25 mg (28%), 50 mg (29%), and 100 mg (29%)--were significantly more effective than placebo (11%, P < 0.05). There was a significant gender interaction for complete response (P < 0.01). Of the patients in the 25-mg and 100-mg dose groups, 12% and 13%, respectively, experienced no nausea (VAS score < 5 mm) versus 5% in the placebo group (P < 0.05). There were no clinically relevant changes in vital signs or laboratory values and no trends with dose for adverse events. Dolasetron is effective for treating PONV and has an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo. The 12.5-mg dose was as effective as larger doses for complete response.

IMPLICATIONS

Nausea and vomiting are common problems for postsurgical patients. In this study of 620 patients undergoing surgery, a 12.5-mg dose of intravenous dolasetron, a new serotonin-receptor blocker, was significantly more effective than placebo in treating established postoperative nausea and vomiting. Dolasetron 12.5 mg was as safe as placebo.

Intravenous dolasetron mesilate in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in females undergoing gynecological surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a range of doses of intravenous (i.v.) dolasetron mesilate, in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

DESIGN

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter trial.

SETTING

Ten hospitals and/or surgical centers.

PATIENTS

281 women undergoing gynecologic surgery with general anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received one of four single, i.v. doses of dolasetron mesilate (12.5 mg, 25 mg, 50 mg, and 100 mg) or placebo administered following cessation of anesthesia.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients were monitored for 24 hours following study drug administration. The antiemetic efficacy of each dolasetron mesilate dose was evaluated by recording the number and timing of emetic episodes, and the effects on nausea were assessed by use of visual analog scales (VAS). Safety was assessed by adverse event reports, clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiographic (ECG) measurements, and monitoring vital signs. Complete responses (patients with no emetic episodes and no escape antiemetic medication requirements in 24 hours) were achieved by 54% in the 12.5-mg, 67% in the 25-mg, and 59% in both the 50-mg and 100-mg dolasetron mesilate dose groups, and by 43% in the placebo group. Nausea VAS assessments demonstrated that dolasetron-treated patients were significantly (p = 0.048) more likely to report no nausea (VAS score < 5 mm) than those in the placebo group. Adverse events reported generally were mild in intensity, and there were no clinically significant changes in laboratory tests, vital signs, or ECG parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Dolasetron was effective and well tolerated for the prevention of PONV in female patients undergoing gynecologic surgery with general anesthesia.

Intravenous dolasetron mesilate ameliorates postoperative nausea and vomiting

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dolasetron mesilate with placebo for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

METHODS

In a randomized, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study 337 adult patients undergoing surgery with general anaesthesia received one of four single, doses of dolasetron mesilate iv (12.5, 25, 50, or 100 mg) or placebo. Study medication was administered postoperatively when the patient reported nausea lasting 10 min or when one emetic episode occurred within two hours of the patient's arrival in the recovery room. Efficacy was assessed by the investigators over the 24-hr study period by recording the number and timing of emetic episodes, the severity of nausea, the timing of administration of escape antiemetic medications, and patients' and investigators' satisfaction with antiemetic therapy.

RESULTS

The study sample was predominately women, and the surgical procedures were primarily gynaecological. All dolasetron mesilate doses produced higher complete response rates than placebo (P < 0.05). Only approximately one-third of dolasetron patients required escape antiemetic medication compared with more than 50% of patients in the placebo group. Both patient and physician satisfaction with dolasetron treatment was high. The most common adverse event was mild or moderate headache for both placebo-treated patients and dolasetron-treated patients. Clinical laboratory results were unremarkable.

CONCLUSION

Single doses of dolasetron mesilate iv, given after the first episode of PONV, were both effective and safe in this adult patient population.

A double-blind, randomized study of two different dosage regimens of intravenous dolasetron in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy

This study compared the antiemetic efficacy and safety of two different intravenous (i.v.) dolasetron dosing regimens in patients receiving their first course of high-dose (> or = 80 mg/m2) cisplatin. Of 30 patients enrolled, 14 received a single i.v. dolasetron dose (0.6 mg/kg) before cisplatin and 16 received a multiple i.v. dose regimen (0.6 mg/kg x 3) given before and after cisplatin. Complete plus major responses were achieved by 71% (10/14) of patients who received single-dose dolasetron and by 50% (8/16) of those who received the multiple-dose regimen. Forty-three percent (6/14) of patients who received the single dose had a complete response compared with 25% (4/16) who received multiple doses. Multiple doses resulted in less nausea at 24 hr following cisplatin; however, differences were not statistically significant. Both regimens were well tolerated, with mild headache (33%) and diarrhea (13%) the most common adverse events. This study demonstrated that a single 0.6-mg/kg dose of dolasetron given before chemotherapy provides equivalent antiemetic efficacy to three 0.6-mg/kg doses given before and after high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy; thus, there was no additional antiemetic benefit by using the multiple-dose regimen.

Pharmacokinetics of the active metabolite (MDL 74,156) of dolasetron mesylate after oral or intravenous administration to anesthetized children

BACKGROUND

Dolasetron mesylate is a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist under investigation as an antiemetic in children. Published studies indicate that its antiemetic activity results from the active metabolite (MDL 74,156), which is produced within 10 minutes of administration of dolasetron mesylate.

METHODS

The pharmacokinetics of MDL 74,156 and the safety and tolerability of dolasetron mesylate were studied after a single oral or intravenous dose of 1.2 mg.kg-1 dolasetron mesylate to healthy children from 2 to 12 years of age. Oral dolasetron was administered to 12 children 1 to 2 hours before anesthesia. Intravenous dolasteron was administered to 18 children at induction of anesthesia. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours after dosing to measure the plasma concentration of MDL 74,156. Indexes of liver and kidney function were determined, and electrocardiograms and adverse events were recorded.

Single-blind study of the effects of intravenous dolasetron mesylate versus ondansetron on electrocardiographic parameters in normal volunteers

A single-blind, randomized, five-way cross-over, safety and tolerability trial was conducted to determine whether intravenous (i.v.) dolasetron mesylate at varying single doses induces changes in ECG intervals in healthy volunteers and to compare these changes with a single intravenous dose of ondansetron or placebo. Thirty healthy male volunteers received 1.2, 1.8, and 2.4 mg/kg i.v. dolasetron mesylate, 32 mg i.v. ondansetron, and placebo on 5 separate days. ECGs were recorded at intervals during the 24 h after study drug administration. The changes in ECG intervals observed after dolasetron mesylate or ondansetron were acute, transient, and asymptomatic. Dolasetron mesylate resulted in slight but statistically significant dose-related increases in heart rate (HR) and PR and QRS intervals (between h 0 and 4). A statistically significant increase in QTc interval was detected with both dolasetron mesylate (2.4 mg/kg) and ondansetron. Ondansetron also produced a slight but statistically significant increase in JT interval and a decrease in HR. These changes in ECG intervals were usually observed between h 0 and 4; all parameters returned to baseline within 8 h of treatment. The results demonstrate that both dolasetron mesylate and ondansetron prolong the QTc interval. However, dolasetron mesylate predominantly altered ECG parameters indicative of ventricular depolarization (QRS duration), whereas ondansetron predominantly affected ventricular repolarization as measured by a prolongation in the JT interval. Both dolasetron and ondansetron were well tolerated. The adverse event (AE) rate was 13.3% (4 of 30); all AE were of mild or moderate severity and were distributed across all dose arms.

Dose-ranging evaluation of the antiemetic efficacy of intravenous dolasetron in patients receiving chemotherapy with doxorubicin or cyclophosphamide

Selective 5-HT3 antagonists have proven to be safe and effective for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Dolasetron is a new highly selective addition to this class of antiemetics that has been shown to have significant antiemetic activity in patients receiving cisplatin-containing regimens. This pilot study was designed to evaluate the antiemetic efficacy of dolasetron in cancer patients receiving doxorubicin and/or cyclophosphamide. This study used an open-label, non-randomized design to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous dolasetron in the prevention of emesis in patients receiving doxorubicin (25-75 mg/m2) and/or cyclophosphamide (400-1200 mg/m2). Sixty-nine patients received a single, intravenous dose of dolasetron over 15-20 min beginning 30 min prior to the start of chemotherapy. Dose levels of dolasetron studied were: 0.3, 0.6, 1.2, 1.8 and 2.4 mg/kg. Patients were monitored for emesis, nausea and adverse events for 24h after the start of chemotherapy. Overall, 61% of patients experienced complete control of emesis. No significant trend towards increased antiemetic efficacy (P = 0.076) or nausea control with increasing dolasetron dose was noted, although the power to detect significant differences was limited by the small number of patients on the 0.3-mg/kg and 2.4-mg/kg dose levels. Age, gender, and type of chemotherapy were significant predictors of complete antiemetic control. Adverse events were generally mild and included headache, chills, lightheadedness, fever, diarrhea, dizziness, and asymptomatic prolongation of ECG intervals. Intravenous dolasetron is safe and effective in the prevention of emesis induced by doxorubicin and/or cyclophosphamide.