Nausea and Vomiting – Cancer Chemotherapy
Studies & Case Studies
Controlled Studies
Dronabinol
• Artim R, DiBella N. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) plus prochlorperazine (PCZ) for refractory nausea and vomiting (N/V). Proceedings of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1983;2:84.
• Chang AE, Shiling DJ, Stillman RC, Goldberg NH, Seipp CA, Barofsky I. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol as an antiemetics in cancer patients receiving high-dose methotrexate. Annals of Internal Medicine 1979;91:819-824.
• Chang AE, Shiling DJ, Stillman RC, Goldberg NH, Seipp CA, Barofsky I, Rosenberg SA.. A prospective evaluation of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol as an antiemetic in patients receiving adriamycin and cytoxan chemotherapy. Cancer 1981; 47: 1746-1751.
• Colls BM, Ferry DG, Gray AJ, Harvey VJ, McQueen EG. The antiemetic activity of tetrahydrocanabinol versus metoclopramide and thiethylperazine in patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy. New Zealand Medical Journal 1980;91:449-451.
• Ekert H, Waters KD, Jurk KH, Mobilia J, Loughnan P. Ameriloration of cancer chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Medical Journal of Australia 1979;2:657-659.
• Frytak S, Moertel CG, O'Fallon JR, Rubin J, Creagan ET, O'Connnell MJ. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol as an antiemetics for patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. A comparison with prochlorperazine and a placebo. Annals of Internal Medicine 1979;91:825-830.
• Gralla RJ, Tyson LB, Bordin LA, Clark RA, Kelsen DP, Kris MG. Antiemetic therapy: a review of recent studies and a report of a random assignment trial comparing metoclopramide with delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Cancer Treatment Report 1984;68:163-172.
• Kluin-Nelemans JC, Nelemans FA, Meuwissen OJATh, Maes RAA. D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) as an antiemetic in patients treated with cancer chemotherapy; a double-blind cross-over trial against placebo. Veterinary and Human Toxicology 1979;21:338-340.
• Lane M, Vogel CL, Ferguson J, Krasnow S, Saiers JL, Hamm J. Dronabinol and prochlorperazine in combination for treatment of cancer chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 1991;6:352-359.
• Levitt M, Faiman C, Hawks R, Wilson A. Randomized double blind comparison of delta-9-tetrahydroicannabinol (THC) and marijuana as chemotherapy antiemetics. Proceedings of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1984;3:91.
• Levitt M, Wilson A, Bowman D, Faiman C, Kemel S, Krepart G. Dose vs response of
tetrahydroannabinol (THC) vs prochlorperazine as chemotherapy antiemetics. Proceedings of the
American Society for Clinical Oncology 1981;22:422.
• McCabe M, Smith FP, Goldberg D, Macdonald J, Woolley PV, Warren R. Efficacy of tetrahydrocannabinol in patients refractory to standard anti-emetic therapy. Investigational New Drugs 1988;6:243-246.
• Neidhart JA, Gagen MM, Wilson HE, Young DC. Comparative trial of the antiemetic effects of THC and haloperidol. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research 1981; 21: 38-42S.
• Orr LE, McKernan JF, Bloome B. Antiemetic effect of tetrahydrocannabinol. Compared with placebo and prochlorperazine in chemotherapy-associated nausea and emesis. Archives of Internal Medicine 1980;140:1431-433.
• Sallan SE, Cronin C, Zelen M, Zinberg NE. Antiemetics in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. A randomized comparison of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and prochlorperazine. New England Journal of Medicine 1980;302:135-138.
• Sallan SE, Zinberg NE, Frei E. Antiemetic effect of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine 1975;293:795-797.
• Ungerleider JT, Andrysiak T, Fairbanks L, Goodnight J, Sarna G, Jamison K. Cannabis and cancer chemotherapy. A comparison of oral delta-9-THC and prochlorperazine. Cancer 1982;50:636-645.
• Ungerleider JT, Sarna G, Fairbanks LA, Goodnight J, Andrysiak T, Jamison K. THC or compazine for the cancer chemotherapy patientthe UCLA study. Part II: patient drug preference. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 1985; 8: 142-147.
• Meiri E, Jhangiani H, Vredenburgh JJ, Barbato LM, Carter FJ, Yang HM, Baranowski V. Efficacy of dronabinol alone and in combination with ondansetron versus ondansetron alone for delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Curr Med Res Opin 2007;23(3):533-43.
Cannabis (smoked)
• Levitt M, Faiman C, Hawks R, Wilson A. Randomized double blind comparison of delta-9-tetrahydroicannabinol (THC) and marijuana as chemotherapy antiemetics. Proceedings of the American Society for Clinical Oncology 1984;3:91.
Nabilone
• Ahmedzai S, Carlyle DL, Clader IT, Moran F. Anti-emetic efficacy and toxicity of nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, in lung cancer chemotherapy. British Journal of Cancer 1983;48:657-663.
• Chan HS, Correia JA, MacLeod SM. Nabilone versus prochlorperazine for control of cancer chemotherapy-induced emesis in children: a double-blind, crossover trial. Pediatrics 1987; 79: 946-952
• Crawford SM, Buckman R. Nabilone and metoclopramide in the treatment of nausea and vomiting due to cisplatinum: a double blind study. Medical Oncology and Tumor Pharmacotherapy 1986; 3: 39-42.
• Cunningham D, Bradley CJ, Forrest GJ, Hutcheon AW, Adams L, Sneddon M, et al. A randomized trial of oral nabilone and prochlorperazine compared to intravenous metoclopramide and dexamethasone in the treatment of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy regimens containing cisplatin or cisplatin analogues. European Journal of Cancer and Clinical Oncology 1988; 24: 685-689.
• Dalzell AM, Bartlett H, Lilleyman JS. Nabilone: An alternative antiemetic for cancer chemotherapy. Archives of Disease in Childhood 1986;61:502-505.
• Einhorn LH, Nagy C, Furnas B, Williams SD. Nabilone: an effective antiemetic in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 1981 Aug-Sep;21(8-9 Suppl):64S-69S.
• George M, Pejovic MH, Thuaire M, Kramar A, Wolff JP. Randomized comparative trial of a new anti-emetic: nabilone, in cancer patients treated with cisplatin. Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy 1983; 37: 24-27.
• Herman TS, Einhorn LH, Jones SE, Nagy C, Chester AB, Dean JC, et al. Superiority of nabilone over prochlorperazine as an antiemetic in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine 1979; 300: 1295-1297.
• Johansson R, Kilkku P, Groenroos M. A double-blind, controlled trial of nabilone vs prochlorperazine for refractory emesis induced by cancer chemotherapy. Cancer Treatment Reviews 1982; 9: 25-33.
• Jones SE, Durant JR, Greco FA, Robertone A. A multi-institutional phase III study of nabilone vs placebo in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Cancer Treatment Reviews 1982; 9: 45-48
• Levitt M. Nabilone vs placebo in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients. Cancer Treatment Reviews 1982; 9(suppl B): 49-53.
• Nagy CM, Furnas BE, Einhorn LH, Bond WH. Nabilone: antiemetic crossover study in cancer chemoptherapy patients. Proceedings of the American Society for Cancer Research 1978;19:30.
• Niederle N, Schutte J, Schmidt CG. Crossover comparison of the antiemetic efficacy of nabilone and alizapride in patients with nonseminomatous testicular cancer receiving cisplatin therapy. Klinische Wochenschrift 1986; 64: 362-365.
• Niiranen Aila, Mattson K. A cross-over comparison of nabilone and prochlorperazine for emesis induced by cancer chemotherapy. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 1985;8:336-340.
• Pomeroy M, Fennelly JJ, Towers M. Prospective randomized double-blind trial of nabilone versus domperidone in the treatment of cytotoxic-induced emesis. Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 1986;17:285-288.
• Priestman SG, Priestman TJ, Canney PA. A double-blind randomised cross-over comparison of nabilone and metoclopramide in the control of radiation-induced nausea. Clinical Radiology 1987; 38: 543-544.
• Steele N, Gralla RJ, Braun Jr DW, Young CW. Double-blind comparison of the antiemetic effects of nabilone and prochlorperazine on chemotherapy-induced emesis. Cancer Treatment Report 1980; 64: 219-224.
• Wada JK, Bogdon DL, Gunnell JC, Hum GJ, Gota CH, Rieth TE. Double-blind, randomized, crossover trial of nabilone vs. placebo in cancer chemotherapy. Cancer Treatment Reviews 1982; 9(Suppl B): 39-44
Levonantradol
• Citron ML, Herman TS, Vreeland F, Krasnow SH, Fossieck BE, Jr. Antiemetic efficacy of levonantradol compared to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Cancer Treatment Reports 1985;69:109-112.
• Higi M, Niederle N, Bremer K, Schmitt G, Schmidt CG, Seeber S. Levonantradol bei der Behandlung von zytostatika-bedingter Nausea and Vomiting. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 1982; 107: 1232-1234.
• Hutcheon AW, Palmer JB, Soukop M, Cunningham D, McArdle C, Welsh J, et al. A randomised multicentre single blind comparison of a cannabinoid anti-emetic (levonantradol) with ychlorpromazine in patients receiving their first cytotoxic chemotherapy. European Journal for Cancer and Clinical Oncology 1983; 19: 1087-1090
• Stambaugh Jr JE, McAdams J, Vreeland F. Dose ranging evaluation of the antiemetic efficacy and toxicity of intramuscular levonantradol in cancer subjects with chemotherapy-induced emesis. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research1984; 24: 480-485
Uncontrolled Studies
Delta-8-THC
• Abrahamov A, Abrahamov A, Mechoulam R. An efficient new cannabinoid antiemetic in pediatric oncology. Life Sciences 1995;56:2097-2102.
Cannabis (smoked)
• Vinciguerra V, Moore T, Brennan E. Inhalation marijuana as an antiemetic for cancer chemotherapy. New York State Journal of Medicine 1988;88:525-527.
• Musty RE, Rossi R. Effects of smoked cannabis and oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on nausea and emesis after cancer chemotherapy: A review of state clinical trials. J Cannabis Ther 2001;1(1):29-42.
Case Reports, Surveys
• Doblin RE, Kleiman MA. Marijuana as antiemetic medicine: a survey of oncologists' experiences and attitudes. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 1991; 9: 1314-1319.
• Schwartz RH, Voth EA, Sheridan MJ. Marijuana to prevent nausea and vomiting in cancer patients: a survey of clinical oncologists. South Medical Journal 1997;90(2):167-72.
You will find scientific information on most of the studies at Database on Clinical Studies and Case Reports.
•Improvement of symptoms or positive evaluation by authors
•No relevant change of symptoms or negative evaluation by authors
•Deterioration of symptoms
Angel McClary Raich after the United States Supreme Court Hears her case No. 03-1454: Gonzales v. Raich 2004-05. Angel just spoke to a large crowd of media reporters and she’s now on her way to another press conference put on by Angel Wings Patient OutReach, Inc. November 24, 2004
If you find a broken link please email us at info@angeljustice.org
Copyright © 2011 Angel Raich. All rights reserved.
The Raich v. Gonzales Case 2007 Update
Join Angel Raich on these social-media networks to stay in touch with Angel and informed medical cannabis world.
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Has your property and/or assets been seized in a federal forfeiture case, commerces clause case, federal raid, federal arrest or any other type of issue where the Gonzales v. Raich case is being used?
Your case does not have to involve medical cannabis.
If so, we want to know about it!
Please email Angel Raich using the link below.
October 5, 2013
October 5, 2013,
I, Angel McClary Raich, did try to stop ObamaCare & ObamaCare's Legal Ramifications - We Citizens Now Face with the Governmental Shutdown! A little bit of sugar makes the medicine go down!! <Read More>