Disodium pamidronate versus mithramycin in the management of tumour-associated hypercalcemia.

Abstract

Twenty-eight consecutive hypercalcemic patients with cancer referred to our department were included in a randomized study, comparing the second generation bisphosphonate pamidronate (APD) with our standard treatment consisting of rehydration, mithramycin (repeatedly) and supportive care. Three patients were excluded, due to rapid deterioration and death, leaving 25 evaluable patients. APD was administered as a single i.v. infusion of 30, 60 or 90 mg depending on the serum calcium, while mithramycin was given in doses of 1.25 mg and repeated if necessary within the first three days. The primary endpoint of the study was the serum calcium day 6. APD normalized serum calcium in all patients, and 12 out of 14 were still normocalcemic day 12. In contrast, mithramycin was effective only in 3 out of 11 patients, and in these patients hypercalcemia recurred rapidly. The success of APD was underscored by the fact that the patients in this group achieved a significantly better performance status after treatment. No serious side-effects were recorded in either group.

• Authors: B Ostenstad, O K Andersen
• Journal: Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) (Acta Oncol) Vol. 31 Issue 8 Pg. 861-4 ( 1992) ISSN: 0284-186X [Print] England
• PMID: 1290634 (Publication Type: Clinical Trial, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial)

Chemical References

• Diphosphonates
• Plicamycin
• Pamidronate

Topics

• Diphosphonates (therapeutic use)
• Humans
• Hypercalcemia (blood, drug therapy, etiology)
• Neoplasms (complications)
• Pamidronate
• Plicamycin (therapeutic use)