Jump to content

Example Queries

From CAMIH
Revision as of 13:23, 14 November 2024 by Cotto (talk | contribs)

Welche Indikationen gibt es für die Einnahme von Selen?

 Outcome nameOutcome specificationResults after interventionOverall RoB judgment
Asfour et al. (2006): Effect of high-dose sodium selenite therapy on polymorphonuclear leukocyte apoptosis in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patientsToxicity
Ejection fraction
Infectionrate after chemotherapy
Cardiac ejection fraction
NA
NA
high risk
high risk
Büntzel et al. (2010): Limited effects of selenium in the prevention of radiation-associated toxicities - results of a randomized study in head neck cancer patientsToxicityGrade of radiotherapy-associated side effects: Xerostomia, stomatitis, ageusia, and dysphagiaNo significant differences; overall number of serious adverse events, not significantly different: intervention arm 23x and control arm 22x (p=0.476)some concerns
Büntzel et al. (2010): Selenium Substitution During Radiotherapy of Solid Tumours - Laboratory Data from Two Observation Studies in Gynaecological and Head and Neck Cancer PatientsSelenium levelSerum concentration and whole blood concentrationAt 6 weeks after irradiation no significant differences; Significant differences in selenium concentrations (serum and blood) at the end of radiotherapy (p<0.0001)NA
Goossens et al. (2016): Phase III randomised chemoprevention study with selenium on the recurrence of non-invasive urothelial carcinoma. The SELEnium and BLAdder cancer TrialRFS (Recurrence-Free Survival)
PFS (Progression-Free Survival)
Selenium level
NA
NA
Measured at baseline and after 3 years
ITT: intervention arm n=43 (28%; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.35) and placebo arm n=45 (32%; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.40); HR: 0.85 (95% CI: 0.56, 1.29); p=0.44, not significant

PP: (all participants remaining in the study after 3 months): intervention arm n=42 and placebo arm n=39 (28%; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.35); HR: 0.96 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.48)); p=0.85, not significant

No influence of age, gender, nicotine consumption, stage, selenium concentration at baseline and hospital
Remark: After 3 months: progression in 24 patients, median progression time 22 months in both arms; Patients in intervention arm had 48% more chance of progression than those in the placebo arm, but not statistically significant (HR = 1.48 (95% CI: 0.65, 3.38); p=0.35);

Progression in the intervention arm 15x, placebo arm 14x ITT: HR: 0.97 (95% CI: 0.47, 2.00); p=0.93, not significant
Significant difference in selenium concentration after 3 years (n=67 (55%)): 187.6 mg/dl ± 57.7 mg/dl intervention arm vs. 88.9 mg/dl ± 22.2 mg/dl placebo arm; p=0.00
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al. (2013): The efficacy of selenium in prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT: a randomized clinical trialHaematological indices
Length of hospital stay
Incidence of acute GVHD (Graft-Versus-Host Disease)
Mortality rate
Non-haematological indices
Selenium level
Mucositis
Fever
Neutrophil and platelet engraftment time (the time point after transplantation at which a patient can maintain a sustained ANC of 4500 cells/mm3 and a sustained platelet count of at least 20 000/mm3 lasting 3 consecutive days without transfusions during hospital stay)
NA
Graft-versus-host disease is a condition where the donated stem cells (graft) attack the recipient's body (host)
At 3 months
Serum creatinine level and blood urea nitrogen test for renal function assessment and aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase for liver function assessment, recorded daily
NA
Oral Mucositis
Duration of fever
NA
No difference between selenium arm (26.92±6.26 days) and placebo arm (25.81±4.33 days); p=0.38
Overall: No difference between the arms; p= 0.35
No difference between the arms; p= 0.69
Overall: No difference between arms for increase in serum creatinine; p=0.31 or increase in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase: p=0.62
Significant difference in mean serum selenium level between two arms at 14 days after transplantation (8.34 mcg/dL in the selenium arm vs 7.36 mcg/dL in the placebo arm), p=0.018
Overall: Cumulative incidence (grade 1-4) comparable in both selenium arm (83.8%) and placebo arm (81.1%); p=0.76; grade 3-4 mucositis significantly lower in selenium arm (10.8%) compared to placebo arm (35.1%); p=0.013 (grade 4: 2x in placebo arm, 0x in selenium arm)


Mean duration comparable (p=0.048), only duration of objective mucositis from grade 2 to 4 and back was significantly shorter in the selenium arm (3.6±1.84 days) than in the placebo arm (5.3±2.2 days); p=0.014
NA
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
high risk
some concerns
Karp et al. (2012): Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III chemoprevention trial of selenium supplementation in patients with resected stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: ECOG 5597OS (Overall Survival)
Toxicity
Selenium level
DFS (Disease-Free Survival)
5-year OS
NA
NA
DFS Randomization until secondary tumors or recurrence and 5-year DFS
Intervention arm: 76.8% (SE, 1.6%) vs. placebo arm: 79.9% (SE, 2.1%); p=0.154


Note: Distribution significantly different for smoking status (p=0.027): active smokers or those who had quit within one year showed a 3-year OS of 85.5% (SE, 1.7%) and 5-year OS of 74.9% (SE, 2.4%), whereas participants who had never smoked showed a 3-year OS of 90% (SE, 2.8%) and a 5-year OS of 83.6% (SE, 3.6%); no difference for DFS; p=0.245
Collected in 865 patients in intervention arm and 477 in placebo arm:

  • Grade 1-2 toxicity in intervention arm: 31% and placebo arm: 26% of subjects
  • Grade ≥ 3 toxicity occurred in less than 2% of subjects in intervention arm and 3% in placebo arm
  • n=1 patient in placebo arm had constitutional lethal toxicity
  • no arm comparison performed
    Selenium level at baseline (n=1,022), year 2 (n=375), and year 4 (n=194): at baseline selenium level mostly in normal range, after 2 and 4 years significantly increased selenium concentration in the intervention arm
    Interim analysis October 2009:

N=83 secondary lung tumors; Rate intervention arm: 1.91 per 100 persons per year vs. 1.36 in placebo arm; p=ns


June 2011: N=252 secondary tumors in 224 patients, of which 98 (out of 97 patients) were lung cancer (38.9%); Lung cancer and other cancers (SPT) in intervention arm: 1.62 and 3.54 per 100 persons per year vs. placebo arm: 1.30 and 3.39 per 100 persons per year; p=0.294


5-year DFS: October 2009: Intervention arm: 72% vs. placebo arm: 78%, no significance values given


June 2011: Intervention arm: 74.4% vs. placebo arm: 79.6%; p=0.69


Note: 5-year DFS rates with subdivision into low, average and high selenium concentration intervention vs. placebo: 75.5% (SE, 10.3%) vs. 72.9% (SE, 12.7%), 75.6% (SE, 2.27%) vs. 78.2% (SE, 3.3%), and 72.9% (SE, 4.5%) vs. 80.9% (SE, 5.2%)
low risk
low risk
low risk
low risk
Laali et al. (2020): Effect of Selenium on Incidence and Severity of Mucositis during Radiotherapy in Patients with Head and Neck CancerSelenium level
Mucositis
NA
Inflammation of the oral mucosa (mucositis) due to radiotherapy
At the end of radiation (after 7 weeks) there was no difference in the mean serum selenium level between the selenium arm and placebo arm (p=0.24)

Based on the selenium level before radiation, developing severe oral mucositis was statistically significant postponed in patients who had selenium levels ≥ 65 mcg/L (p=0.04)
After 7 weeks no significant differences between the selenium arm and the placebo arm for:

  • mean duration of oral mucositis (grade 1–4) (p=0.27)
  • onset of oral mucosits (p =0.31)
  • recovery (day after radiation completion (p=0.80)
  • cumulative incidence of oral mucusitis (grade 1–4) (p=0.79)


Severe oral mucositis (grade 3 or 4) was seen in 25 patients in the selenium arm and in 20 patients in the placebo arm.


Addition: Development of oral mucositis in patients with selenium levels >65 mcg/l significantly delayed from baseline (p=0.04, no further explanation given)
NA
high risk
Mix et al. (2015): Randomized phase II trial of selenomethionine as a modulator of efficacy and toxicity of chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neckMucositis
Tumor response
PFS (Progression-Free Survival)
OS (Overall Survival)
Quality of life
Toxicity
Grade 3 or 4
Complete response rate (CR)
NA
NA
Measured with EORTC C-30 Version 3 and EORTC QLQ - H&N35
Other treatment-associated side effects such as xerostomia, renal impairment, hearing dysfunction, and myelosuppression
Overall: No significant differences between arms (grade 3 intervention arm 2x, placebo arm 3x, no grade 4)
Only one patient from the intervention arm did not reach CR and died
After 12 months: No significant differences between arms
After 12 months: No significant differences between arms
No significant difference for week 6-8 post-treatment and Follow-up within a year
Overall:
  • Hearing dysfunction n=1 each in the intervention arm and placebo arm;
  • elevated creatinine n=1 in the placebo arm;
  • myelosuppression: anemia in the placebo arm n=1;
  • leukopenia in the intervention arm n=3 and placebo arm n=2;
  • dermatitis in the intervention arm n=2;
  • dry mouth in the placebo arm n=2;
  • dysgeusia in the intervention arm n=2, placebo arm n=1;
  • odyno-/dysphagia in the intervention arm n=1, placebo arm n=2;
  • oral/throat pain in the placebo arm n=2;
  • mucus/sputum intervention arm n=3, placebo arm n=1
some concerns
low risk
low risk
low risk
some concerns
some concerns
Muecke et al. (2010): Multicenter, phase 3 trial comparing selenium supplementation with observation in gynecologic radiation oncologySelenium level
Toxicity
Performance Status
Quality of life
DFS (Disease-Free Survival)
OS (Overall Survival)
Efficiancy of supplementation
Diarrhea
NA
NA
NA
NA
After 6 weeks post radiotherapy, levels between arms were comparable
Overall incidence of grade 2 diarrhea: intervention arm 20.5% vs. control arm 44.5% (p = 0.04)
No difference between arms
No difference between arms
Median follow-up of 49 months (range, 0-75): 5-year disease free survival in the intervention arm was 80.1% vs. 83.2% in the control arm, no significant difference; p = 0.74
Median follow-up of 51 months (range 6-75): 5-year overall survival in the intervention arm was 91.9% vs. 83.1% in the control arm, no significant difference; p = 0.34
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
Muecke et al. (2013): Impact of treatment planning target volumen (PTV) size on radiation induced diarrhoea following selenium supplementation in gynecologic radiation oncology-a subgroup analysis of a multicenter, phase III trialToxicityDiarrheaNAsome concerns
Muecke et al. (2014): Multicenter, phase 3 trial comparing selenium supplementation with observation in gynecologic radiation oncology: follow-up analysis of the survival data 6 years after cessation of randomizationDFS (Disease-Free Survival)
OS (Overall Survival)
10-year disease-free survival
10-year overall survival
10-year disease-free survival intervention arm 80.1% vs. control arm 83.2%; not significant; p = 0.65
10-year overall survival intervention arm 55.3% vs. control arm 42.7%; not significant; p = 0.09
high risk
high risk
Stratton et al. (2010): Oral Selenium Supplementation Has No Effect on Prostate- Specific Antigen Velocity in Men Undergoing Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate CancerPSA level (Prostate-Specific Antigen)Change over 5 yearsAfter 5 years: selenium arms not significantly different to placebo arm (p=0.32 and p=0.61) or to each other Subgroup of high-selenium arm with high selenium value at baseline shows higher PSA values than placebo arm (p=0.018)some concerns

Hilft Vitamin C gegen Fatigue?

 Results after intervention
Jeon et al. (2016): Effect of intravenous high dose Vitamin C on postoperative pain and morphine use after laparoscopic colectomy: A randomized controlled trialEstimated mean (SD) from graphic:

2, 6 and 24h post-op: at rest significantly lower in intervention compared to placebo; p's<0.05 (no values reported, only graphs)

While coughing: no significant difference at any time point; p's>0.05
Morphine use (in mg) at 2h was significantly lower in intervention arm (p<0.05), no significant difference between the two arms at 6h and 24h (p's>0.05).
No difference between groups in postoperative fatigue scores (p's>0.05)
Rescue analgesics were required more frequently in the placebo arm; significant difference compared to intervention arm (p = 0.00).

Frequency as Mean(SD): Intervention: 0.8(0.8)

Placebo: 1.4(1.0)

Welche Evidenz gibt es für Vitamin C hochdosiert?

Welche Nebenwirkungen hat Curcumin?

 Side Effects / Interactions
Hejazi et al. (2013): A pilot clinical trial of radioprotective effects of curcumin supplementation in patients with prostate cancerAccording to information no side effects
According to information no side effect
Hejazi et al. (2016): Effect of Curcumin Supplementation During Radiotherapy on Oxidative Status of Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Double Blinded, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled StudyAccording to information no side effects
According to information no side effect
Mansourian et al. (2015): The effect of "curcuma Longa" topical gel on radiation -induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancerNI
NI
Rao et al. (2014): The Indian Spice Turmeric Delays and Mitigates Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis in Patients Undergoing Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer: An Investigational StudyNI
NI
Ryan et al. (2013): Curcumin for radiation dermatitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of thirty breast cancer patientsAccording to information no side effects.
According to information no side effects.

Hilft Curcumin gegen Übelkeit?

Outcome Übelkeit kommt bei Topic Curcumin nicht vor.

Verbessert Vitamin D die Osteoporose?

In welcher Dosis sollte Vitamin D eingenommen werden?

 Dosage and regime
Akiba et al. (2018): Vitamin D Supplementation and Survival of Patients with Non–small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled TrialTwo capsules of vitamin D3 (total 1,200 IU/day), for 12 months
Two capsule form and identical in appearance and taste, containing sesame oil, gelatin derived from swine, and glycerin, for 12 months
Antunac et al. (2018): Vitamin D Supplementation and Survival in Metastatic Colorectal CancerCholecalciferol 2000 IU daily, for 2 years or until death, whichever came first
Only standard chemotherapy
Attia et al. (2008): Randomized, Double-Blinded Phase II Evaluation of Docetaxel with or without Doxercalciferol in Patients with Metastatic, Androgen-Independent Prostate CancerSupplied by Genzyme as 2.5 μg soft gel capsules,10 μg (i.e., four capsules of 2.5 μg) of doxercalciferol orally each day of the chemotherapy cycles before breakfast and at the same time,

Duration: for 1-12 cycles of chemotherapy (each cycle: 28 days), median duration: 6 cycles
10 μg of placebo (equal in weight to, and containing only the inactive ingredients found in, the doxercalciferol capsules), orally each day of the chemotherapy cycles before breakfast and at the same time,

Duration: for 1-12 cycles of chemotherapy (each cycle: 28 days), median duration: 6 cycles
... further results

Für/gegen was ist die Einnahme von Aloe empfehlenswert?

 Outcome name
Heggie et al. (2002): A phase III study on the efficacy of topical aloe vera gel on irradiated breast tissueToxicity
Toxicity
Toxicity
Toxicity
Hoopfer et al. (2015): Three-arm randomized phase III trial: Quality aloe and placebo cream versus powder as skin treatment during breast cancer radiation therapyToxicity
Toxicity
Toxicity
Lissoni et al. (1998): Biotherapy with the Pineal Immunomodulating Hormone Melatonin versus Melatonin plus Aloe vera in Untreatable Advanced Solid NeoplasmsTumor response
Lissoni et al. (2009): A Randomized Study of Chemotherapy versus Biochemotherapy with Chemotherapy plus Aloe arborescens in Patients with Metastatic CancerTumor response
Toxicity
Mansouri et al. (2016): The Effect of Aloe Vera Solution on Chemotherapy-Induced Stomatitis in Clients with Lymphoma and Leukemia: A Randomized Controlled Clinical TrialStomatitis
Pain
Marucci et al. (2017): Double-blind randomized phase III study comparing a mixture of natural agents versus placebo in the prevention of acute mucositis during chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancerToxicity
Pain
Olsen et al. (2001): The effect of aloe vera gel/mild soap versus mild soap alone in preventing skin reactions in patients undergoing radiation therapyToxicity
Puataweepong et. al (2009): The efficacy of oral Aloe vera juice for radiation induced mucositis in head and neck cancer patients: a double-blind placebo-controlled studyMucositis
Mucositis
Mucositis
Sahebjamee et al. (2015): Comparative Efficacy of Aloe vera and Benzydamine Mouthwashes on Radiation-induced Oral Mucositis: A Triple-blind, Randomised, Controlled Clinical TrialMucositis
Sahebnasagh et al. (2017): Successful Treatment of Acute Radiation Proctitis with Aloe Vera: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Clinical TrialToxicity
Mental status/ function
Quality of life
Toxicity
Su et al. (2004): Phase II double-blind randomized study comparing oral aloe vera versus placebo to prevent radiation-related mucositis in patients with head-and-neck neoplasmsMucositis
Mucositis
Mucositis
Quality of life
Williams et al. (1996): Phase III double-blind evaluation of an aloe vera gel as a prophylactic agent for radiation-induced skin toxicity

Hilft Aloe bei Mukositis?

 Results after interventionOverall RoB judgment
Jahangard-Rafsanjani et al. (2013): The efficacy of selenium in prevention of oral mucositis in patients undergoing hematopoietic SCT: a randomized clinical trialNA
No difference between selenium arm (26.92±6.26 days) and placebo arm (25.81±4.33 days); p=0.38
Overall: No difference between the arms; p= 0.35
No difference between the arms; p= 0.69
Overall: No difference between arms for increase in serum creatinine; p=0.31 or increase in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase: p=0.62
Significant difference in mean serum selenium level between two arms at 14 days after transplantation (8.34 mcg/dL in the selenium arm vs 7.36 mcg/dL in the placebo arm), p=0.018
Overall: Cumulative incidence (grade 1-4) comparable in both selenium arm (83.8%) and placebo arm (81.1%); p=0.76; grade 3-4 mucositis significantly lower in selenium arm (10.8%) compared to placebo arm (35.1%); p=0.013 (grade 4: 2x in placebo arm, 0x in selenium arm)


Mean duration comparable (p=0.048), only duration of objective mucositis from grade 2 to 4 and back was significantly shorter in the selenium arm (3.6±1.84 days) than in the placebo arm (5.3±2.2 days); p=0.014
NA
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
some concerns
high risk
some concerns
Laali et al. (2020): Effect of Selenium on Incidence and Severity of Mucositis during Radiotherapy in Patients with Head and Neck CancerAt the end of radiation (after 7 weeks) there was no difference in the mean serum selenium level between the selenium arm and placebo arm (p=0.24)

Based on the selenium level before radiation, developing severe oral mucositis was statistically significant postponed in patients who had selenium levels ≥ 65 mcg/L (p=0.04)
After 7 weeks no significant differences between the selenium arm and the placebo arm for:

  • mean duration of oral mucositis (grade 1–4) (p=0.27)
  • onset of oral mucosits (p =0.31)
  • recovery (day after radiation completion (p=0.80)
  • cumulative incidence of oral mucusitis (grade 1–4) (p=0.79)


Severe oral mucositis (grade 3 or 4) was seen in 25 patients in the selenium arm and in 20 patients in the placebo arm.


Addition: Development of oral mucositis in patients with selenium levels >65 mcg/l significantly delayed from baseline (p=0.04, no further explanation given)
NA
high risk
Mix et al. (2015): Randomized phase II trial of selenomethionine as a modulator of efficacy and toxicity of chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neckOverall: No significant differences between arms (grade 3 intervention arm 2x, placebo arm 3x, no grade 4)
Only one patient from the intervention arm did not reach CR and died
After 12 months: No significant differences between arms
After 12 months: No significant differences between arms
No significant difference for week 6-8 post-treatment and Follow-up within a year
Overall:
  • Hearing dysfunction n=1 each in the intervention arm and placebo arm;
  • elevated creatinine n=1 in the placebo arm;
  • myelosuppression: anemia in the placebo arm n=1;
  • leukopenia in the intervention arm n=3 and placebo arm n=2;
  • dermatitis in the intervention arm n=2;
  • dry mouth in the placebo arm n=2;
  • dysgeusia in the intervention arm n=2, placebo arm n=1;
  • odyno-/dysphagia in the intervention arm n=1, placebo arm n=2;
  • oral/throat pain in the placebo arm n=2;
  • mucus/sputum intervention arm n=3, placebo arm n=1
some concerns
low risk
low risk
low risk
some concerns
some concerns

Schützt Aloe vor Hautentzündungen?

In welcher Dosis sollte man Ingwer bei Übelkeit einsetzen?

 Outcome nameDosage and regime
Ansari et al. (2016): Efficacy of Ginger in Control of Chemotherapy Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Doxorubicin- Based ChemotherapyNausea
Vomiting
Daily dose 2x2 ginger capsules (250mg ginger powder each), every 12h for 3 days over 3 cycles, start not specified
Daily dose 2x2 capsules, every 12h for 3 days over 3 cycles, start not specified
Fahimi et al. (2011): Evaluating the Effect of Zingiber Officinalis on Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Cisplatin Based RegimensNausea
Vomiting
Four capsules of powdered ginger (Zintoma®, Gol Daru) daily (each capsule contained 250 mg of ginger)
Four capsules of placebo (lactose)
Lua et al. (2015): Effects of inhaled ginger aromatherapy on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and health-related quality of life in women with breast cancerNausea
Quality of life
Unspecified effects
Antiemetics + bottle with 2 drops of ginger oil

Glass pendant (in the form of a small flask), to be hung approx. 20 cm from the nose, the bottle was held directly under the nose and inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 2 minutes each time

Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy
Worn for 5 days at a time from the day of the chemotherapy, inhaled deeply at least 3 times a day for 3 periods of 2 minutes each

Start: Day 1 of chemotherapy
Panahi et al. (2012): Effect of Ginger on Acute and Delayed Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Pilot, Randomized, Open-Label Clinical TrialNausea and Vomiting
Nausea and Vomiting
Nausea and Vomiting
Daily dose 3x0.5g Every 8h, starting 30min after chemotherapy
Every 8h, starting 30min after Chemotherapy
Ryan et al. (2011): Ginger (Zingiber officinale) reduces acute chemotherapy-induced nausea: a URCC CCOP study of 576 patientsNausea
Nausea
Quality of life
Vomiting
250mg 2x3 ginger capsules (liquid extract from ginger root in virgin olive oil + excipients, 1.5g ginger daily)

1.5g daily
2x1 placebo capsules 250mg 2x2 ginger capsules ((liquid extract from ginger root in virgin olive oil + excipients and placebo capsules, 1.0g ginger daily)
2x2 placebo capsules

250mg 2x1 ginger capsules (liquid extract from ginger root in virgin olive oil + excipients and placebo capsules, 0.5g ginger daily)
2x3 placebo capsules
Sontakke et al. (2003): Ginger as an antiemetic in nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy: A randomized, cross-over, double blind studyNausea
Vomiting
Vomiting
Toxicity
Two capsules, each containing 500 mg of gin- ger powder, orally, 2 ml of normal saline IV, 20 min prior to chemotherapy. Two capsules of ginger were repeated after 6 h of cancer chemotherapy.
2 capsules of lactulose orally and injection metoclopramide 20 mg IV, 20 min prior to chemotherapy. Two capsules of 5 mg metoclopramide each, orally after 6 h
2 capsules of lactulose orally and injection ondansetron 4 mg IV, 20 min prior to chemotherapy and two capsules of ondansetron, 2 mg each, orally after 6 h.
Uthaipaisanwong et al. (2020): Effects of ginger adjunct to the standard prophylaxis on reducing carboplatin and paclitaxel-induced nausea vomiting: a randomized controlled studyNausea
Nausea
Vomiting
Toxicity
Daily dose 4x500mg before meals and one in the evening from day 1 to day 5 of chemotherapy

+ standard antiemetic medication included 20 mg of dexamethasone, 8 mg of ondansetron, and 50 mg of ranitidine which were injected 30 min before chemotherapy administration; if necessary 50mg dimenhydrinate before chemotherapy and 5 days at home
Daily dose before meals and one in the evening from day 1 to day 5 of chemotherapy

+ standard antiemetic medication included 20 mg of dexamethasone, 8 mg of ondansetron, and 50 mg of ranitidine which were injected 30 min before chemotherapy administration; if necessary 50mg dimenhydrinate before chemotherapy and 5 days at home
Zick et al. (2008): Phase II trial of encapsulated ginger as a treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomitingUnspecified effects
Nausea and Vomiting
Nausea and Vomiting
Toxicity
8 capsules daily
1.0-g ginger dose,

- Each capsule contained 250 mg dry extract of ginger root [10:1 (v/v) extraction solvent (ethanol 50%)/root] standard- ized to 15 mg (5%) of total gingerols - four capsules ginger and four capsules placebo daily
2.0-g ginger dose - Each capsule contained 250 mg dry extract of ginger root [10:1 (v/v) extraction solvent (ethanol 50%)/root] standardized to 15 mg (5%) of total gingerols

- 8 capsuels daily