←Nausea
Study register · detail RCT (cross-over) · Nausea · 1987

A double-blind randomised cross-over comparison of nabilone and metoclopramide in the control of radiation-induced nausea.

Priestman et al. ·Clinical Radiology
No benefit demonstrated GRADE Moderate 34 citations
Samplen = 40 Pat.
DurationAt least 5 remaining radiation…
ControlMetoclopramide
EndpointNausea/vomiting
Blindingdoppelblind
DesignRCT (cross-over)
Cannabinoidthc
Routeoral
Key finding

Nabilone offers no efficacy advantage over metoclopramide, but causes more side effects.

Summary

n=40 patients with radiation-induced nausea/vomiting; nabilone vs. metoclopramide; no difference in efficacy (p not significant); ADR rate significantly higher with nabilone than with metoclopramide.

P
PopulationPatients with radiation-induced nausea/vomiting, n=40
I
InterventionNabilone (oral, crossover)
C
ControlMetoclopramide
O
OutcomeNo significant difference in antiemetic efficacy between nabilone and metoclopramide; however significantly more and more severe side effects under nabilone
Confidence in the evidence
Moderate

The third of four GRADE levels, the effect estimate is probably reliable.

Downgraded for
Imprecision
Quality profile
Sample size ★★★★★
Blinding Double-blind
Effect size No benefit
Citations / year ★★★★★
Authors
Priestman SG, Priestman TJ, Canney PA.
DOI 10.1016/s0009-9260(87)80151-4↗
Design: RCT (cross-over)
Share
Abstract
Forty patients who were suffering from radiation induced emesis were entered into a prospectively randomised double-blind cross-over study comparing nabilone with metoclopramide. Only patients who had at least five treatments remaining of their planned course of irradiation were randomised, in order to allow an adequate time to monitor the degree of symptom control and any adverse effects of the two drugs. Patient characteristics and the incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting were similar for the two groups. There was no difference in the efficacy of the two drugs but the incidence and severity of adverse reactions was significantly greater in those patients who received nabilone.
Indication
Further studies on Nausea
All studies →
S Tramèr et al. · 2001 · BMJ
604 citations
Cannabinoids for control of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting: quantitative systematic review
Mixed Systematische Review + Meta-Analyse

Systematische Review über k=30 RCTs (n=1.366) zu Cannabinoiden bei chemotherapie-induzierter Übelkeit. Cannabinoide (Nabilon, Dronabinol, Levonantradol oral/i.m.) vs. konventionelle Antiemetika (Prochlorperazin, Metoclopramid u.a.): RR=1.38 (95% CI 1.18-1.62, NNT=6) für komplette Übelkeitskontrolle; RR=1.28 (1.08-1.51, NNT=8) für komplette Erbrechenskontrolle. Patientenpräferenz für Cannabinoide: RR=2.39 (2.05-2.78, NNT=3). Häufigere Nebenwirkungen: Schwindel NNT=3, Dysphorie NNT=8, Halluzinationen NNT=17, Paranoia NNT=20, Hypotonie NNT=7. Abbruch wegen Nebenwirkungen: RR=4.67 (3.07-7.09, NNT=11).

10.1136/bmj.323.7303.16 View study →
S Smith et al. · 2015 · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
254 citations
Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting in adults with cancer receiving chemotherapy
Mixed Cochrane Systematische Review

Cochrane SR über k=23 RCTs (1975-1991) zu Cannabinoiden bei chemotherapie-induzierter Übelkeit und Erbrechen. Cannabinoide (Nabilon, Dronabinol, Levonantradol) vs. konventionelle Antiemetika: RR=1.38 (95% CI 1.18-1.62, NNT=6) für komplette Übelkeitskontrolle; RR=1.28 (1.08-1.51, NNT=8) für komplette Erbrechenskontrolle. Patienten bevorzugten Cannabinoide für zukünftige Zyklen: RR=2.39 (2.05-2.78, NNT=3). Häufigere Nebenwirkungen: Schwindel RR=2.97 (NNT=3), Euphorie NNT=7, Halluzinationen NNT=17, Paranoia NNT=20.

10.1002/14651858.cd009464.pub2 View study →
S Whiting et al. · 2015 · JAMA
2103 citations
Cannabinoids for Medical Use
Mixed

Umfassende SR über 79 RCTs (n=6.462) zu medizinischem Cannabis; moderate Evidenz für Chemotherapie-induzierte Übelkeit/Erbrechen (CINV): Cannabinoide vs. Placebo zeigten signifikante Überlegenheit (OR=3.82, 95% CI 1.55–9.42), vergleichbare Wirksamkeit zu konventionellen Antiemetika bei höherer Nebenwirkungsrate.

10.1001/jama.2015.6358 View study →

The impediment to action advances action. — Marcus Aurelius