Phase II Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of the Oral Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonist Casopitant (GW679769) Administered with Ondansetron for the Prevention of Postoperative and Postdischarge Nausea and Vomiting in High-risk Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been an increased interest in using a multimodal approach with combined agents to treat postoperative nausea and vomiting. This study evaluated whether the addition of an oral dose of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist casopitant improved the antiemetic efficacy of an intravenous dose of ondansetron hydrochloride. METHODS: The authors enrolled 702 premenopausal or perimenopausal, nonsmoking, female patients aged 18-55 yr with a history of postoperative nausea and vomiting and/or motion sickness undergoing a laparoscopic or laparotomic gynecologic surgical procedure or laparoscopic cholecystectomy with general anesthesia. Subjects were randomized to one of five treatment arms: standard ondansetron 4 mg with casopitant at 0, 50, 100, or 150 mg, or 0 mg ondansetron with casopitant at 150 mg (the latter arm was considered an exploratory study group and was included in the safety analysis but not in the efficacy analysis). RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of patients in all of the active casopitant plus ondansetron groups achieved a complete response (i.e., no vomiting, retching, rescue medication, or premature withdrawal) during the first 24 h postoperatively versus those in the ondansetron-alone group (59-62% vs. 40%, respectively; P = 0.0006). All active doses seemed to be well tolerated; headache, dizziness, and constipation were the most frequently reported adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ondansetron alone, the casopitant and ondansetron combination results in superior emesis prevention during the first 24 h postoperatively in female patients with known risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".