Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0000737 (abdominal pain)
 31,184 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

This double-blind, double-dummy, randomized study compared the 24 h efficacy and safety of granisetron alone (3 mg i.v. over 30 s) or in combination with methylprednisolone (250 mg i.v. twice daily) in preventing nausea and vomiting in 308 patients (254 males) receiving high-dose cisplatin (100 mg/m2 or above) for mainly lung, and head and neck cancers. All patients received oral follow-on therapy comprising oral granisetron and methylprednisolone during the following 6 days. Primary efficacy variables were the proportions of complete responses (CR; no vomiting, no worse than mild nausea, no rescue and no withdrawal), no vomiting and no nausea over the first 24 h following initiation of the cisplatin infusion. The two treatment groups were well matched for demographics, cancer site, cisplatin dose and duration of infusion. Granisetron plus methylprednisolone was significantly more effective than granisetron alone for all primary efficacy variables: CR 78 versus 59% (p<0.001), no vomiting 80 versus 61% (p<0.001) and no nausea 74 versus 57% (p<0.002). Significantly more patients receiving the combination were free of any emetic symptoms (74 versus 54%, p<0.001). Significantly fewer patients receiving combination therapy also required rescue therapy with i.v. granisetron (12.2 versus 21.7%, p=0.026). During the follow-on period, complete response rates varied day by day from 50 to 71%. Both treatments were well tolerated, with constipation, abdominal pain and headache as the most frequent adverse events.
 ...
PMID:Granisetron plus methylprednisolone for the control of high-dose cisplatin-induced emesis. 966 May 34

The irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a consortium of symptoms including abdominal pain and alterations in the pattern of defaecation. There is no single pathophysiological marker of IBS although it is generally accepted that some patients do have abnormalities of intestinal motility and/or enhanced visceral sensitivity. There is also an increasing acceptance that the central nervous system, an important component of the brain-gut axis, also plays an important role in symptom production both in the response to stress and when there is an underlying affective disorder. During the past decade new therapeutic targets have been identified that have permitted the development of new drugs with therapeutic potential for IBS. Identification and characterization of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) receptors in the gastrointestinal tract particularly 5-HT3 and 5-HT4 receptors, which are involved not only in modulating gut motility but in visceral sensory pathways, has led to a number of studies of 5-HT3 (Alosetron, Granisetron and Ondansetron) and 5-HT4 (SB-207266A) antagonists. Both classes of drug appear to reduce visceral sensitivity and have inhibitory effects on motor activity in the distal intestine. Early clinical studies suggest that these agents may have a role in painful, diarrhoea-predominant IBS. 5-HT4 agonists (HTF919, Zelmac) may improve constipation-predominant IBS by normalizing bowel habit and thereby reducing abdominal pain. Alternative approaches to reducing visceral sensation include the use of the opioid kappa agonists, which have no central opioid effects although clinical trials have suggested that these agents are not highly effective in relieving IBS pain. There are in addition, new approaches to modify intestinal motility including the development of gut selective muscarinic M3 receptor antagonists such as zamifenacin and the 5-HT4 partial agonist, HTF919. Preliminary studies suggest that these agents may have therapeutic potential in IBS. Anti-depressants are increasingly used to treat affective disorder in IBS but in addition appear to have added value because of their ability to reduce visceral hypersensitivity and alter gut transit. Therapeutic effects are often obtained at doses below those normally used to treat depression. IBS continues to be a therapeutic challenge because of its diverse symptomatology and lack of a single pathophysiological target for drug intervention.
 ...
PMID:Irritable bowel syndrome: new pharmaceutical approaches to treatment. 1058 Sep 22

Effect of ondansetron and granisetron were evaluated in sixty (60) children (age 4-11 years) irrespective of sex, diagnosed case of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who received high dose methotrexate and did not receive any antiemetic 24 hours prior to HDMTX. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, single center study. Of 60 children, 30 received oral ondansetron (4mg) and rest 30 granisetron (1mg) half an hour before therapy. Drugs were randomly allocated with appropriate code. The patients were followed up from day 1 to day 5 of therapy. Episodes of nausea and vomiting were recorded and scorings was done every 24 hours following chemotherapy. No significant difference was found between two groups according to acute emesis (Day-1) (p=0.053). In day two and day three it was significant (p<0.05). In day four it was significant (p=0.002). Early chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) were controlled 90% in children who received granisetron and 70% in children who received ondansetron. Delayed (Day 2-4) CINV were controlled in 80% of children who received granisetron and 43.4% who received ondansetron (p<0.05). Granisetron group required additional doses only 3.3% cases and ondanseton group 30% cases on the second day (p<0.05). Result was significant between two groups. About 36.7% patients had episodes of nausea on day four of chemotherapy in ondansetron group and it was only 3.3% in granisetron group due to adverse effects of antiemetic drug itself (p=0.001). Maximum episodes of vomiting were found on the second day in ondansetron group 33.3% and in granisetron group 3.3% (p=0.003). Though adverse effects like headache, constipation, abdominal pain and loose motion were common in both group of children but their number was much less in children who received granisetron. On second day of therapy score of nausea and vomiting was maximum in ondansetron and minimum in granisetron treated on day 4 and the result was significant. So, to prevent acute and delayed CINV in children with ALL, oral graniseteron can be considered as more effective and well tolerated with minimum adverse effects compared with ondansetrons.
 ...
PMID:Ondansetron versus granisetron in the prevention of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. 2208 Nov 89