FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 329:1356-1357 October 28, 1993 Number 18 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Herrstedt, J.

To the Editor: The conclusion of Herrstedt et al. (April 15 issue)¹ that "ondansetron plus metopimazine is a highly effective and safe antiemetic regimen that is markedly superior to treatment with ondansetron alone in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy" is misleading.

The primary end point of antiemetic treatment is complete protection from vomiting and nausea, not the mean number of emetic episodes and the mean score of nausea. These are generally evaluated as secondary end points.

Considering the data on complete protection from vomiting as marginals of a two-by-two table, we found that the two-sided McNemar test indicated no significance . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Labs, K.-H., Jaeger, K. A. (2000). The Value of D-Dimer Testing in Diagnostic Strategies for Symptomatic Patients with Suspected Deep Vein Thrombosis. VASC ENDOVASCULAR SURG 34: 101-105