PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

E Piana

Publications and source records attributed to E Piana.

27 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1978

A possible new approach to the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: massive doses of medroxyprogesterone acetate.

The results obtained with a new hormone therapy using medroxyprogesterone acetate (MAP) in previously untested single and total doses in the treatment of advanced breast cancer are reported. Fifty-two postmenopausal patients were treated with an average total dose of 40 g of MAP for a period of 30 days. Nineteen of 44 patients (43%) had complete or partial remission, while the disease remained unchanged in nine of 44 patients (20%). Disease progression occurred in 12 of 44 patients (27%). Partial or complete remission occurred in 12 of 18 (67%) and four of six (67%) of the patients with dominant osseous and soft tissue metastases respectively. Three of ten (16%) of those with visceral metastases had remission. The average duration of remission was 7 months. Average survival times were 15.5 months for patients with remission, 8 months for those with no change, and 2.5 months for those with disease progression. From a subjective standpoint, pain was reduced significantly or disappeared in 34 of 36 patients (94%); this was also the case with respect to dyspnea (13 of 16 patients [81%]), anorexia (24 of 29 [83%]), asthenia (28 of 35 [80%]), and walking impairment (15 of 24 [63%]). When relapse occurred, patients previously treated with massive doses of MAP received further treatment with higher doses of MAP; four of 22 (18%) of the patients attained partial remission once again. Positive effects were also seen in subjective performance status, body weight, and EKG. We also describe the new clinical and toxicologic features of this treatment.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

High-dose cyclophosphamide versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-FU, and hydroxyurea (CMFH) in the treatment of stage III non-small cell bronchogenic carcinoma: a randomized trial.

Fifty-eight patients with non-small cell carcinoma of the lung (33 with epidermoid carcinoma, 22 with adenocarcinoma, and three with large cell anaplastic carcinoma) were treated with high-dose cyclophosphamide (CTX) or, alternatively, with CTX, methotrexate, 5-FU, and hydroxyurea (CMFH) in a controlled study. Two partial remissions were achieved (one in each regimen [13%]. Seventeen of 29 patients treated with CTX and 14 of 29 patients treated with CMFH showed no change (differences were not statistically significant). Toxicity was moderate in both regimens. Median survival was 24 weeks for patients treated with CTX and 26 weeks for patients treated with CMFH (differences were not significant). The results show that the therapeutic activity of CMFH is not higher than that of CTX alone.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Comparative crossover trial of two intravenous doses of granisetron (1 mg vs 3 mg) + dexamethasone in the prevention of acute cis-platinum-induced emesis.

BACKGROUND: The 5HT3 receptor antagonist Granisetron (GRA) is available on the market as a 1 mg vial in USA and as a 3 mg vial in Europe. This study aimed to compare the two i.v. doses of GRA (3 mg vs 1 mg), both of which combined with Dexamethasone (DEX) (20 mg) in the prevention of acute Cisplatinum (CP)-induced emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and ninety-eight consecutive chemotherapy-naive cancer patients, mainly suffering from lung and bladder cancer, were randomized at their first cycle to receive either GRA 1 mg + DEX or GRA 3 mg + DEX as i.v. bolus prior to chemotherapy and crossed-over to another GRA dose at the second cycle. The cytotoxic treatment included different multi-drug regimens containing CP (median dose 60 mg/m2, range 50-70) administered on day 1 and repeated every 21-28 days. RESULTS: Of the 192 evaluable patients complete protection from acute emesis with GRA 1 and GRA 3, was observed after the 1st + 2nd cycles as follows: nausea 70% and 74%, vomiting 90% and 94%, nausea and vomiting 67% and 74% respectively (no statistically significant difference). No carry-over effect was observed on the complete protection from emesis. The crossover analysis comprising 156 patients confirmed there were no differences between the two antiemetic treatments. Twenty-seven per cent of patients preferred GRA 1, 31% preferred GRA 3, while 42% expressed no preference (P = 0.75). Nor was any difference observed for tolerability, the only reported side-effects being mild headache (16% vs 17%) and constipation (18% vs 25%). CONCLUSION: This study shows that, under the above conditions, the 1 mg and 3 mg i.v. GRA doses are comparably effective when combined with DEX 20 mg in the prevention of acute CP-induced emesis.

Adult↗