Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:2693621rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0030705lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0013216lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0087111lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025815lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0034656lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0003297lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0010583lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0016360lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025677lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025853lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0950521lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0681870lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1522673lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:issue6lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:dateCreated1990-3-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:abstractTextNineteen women receiving their first cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer were randomized between two antiemetic drugs: methylprednisolone (MPN) 125mg and metoclopramide (MCP) 20mg, both given by intravenous push as a single dose. The chemotherapy included: cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). The total response rates for MPN and MCP were: complete protection 11% versus 0% and partial protection 63% versus 11% of the patients, respectively (P = 0.007). Eighteen patients (95%) preferred MPN over MCP. Common side effects with both drugs were: drowsiness, headache and diarrhea. MPN is recommended as an antiemetic in patients receiving CMF adjuvant chemotherapy.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:monthDeclld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:issn1120-009Xlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BiranSSlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:SulkesAAlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:GercAAlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:GezEElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:CashTTlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:NathanSSlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:OchayonLLlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorpubmed-author:RubelloEElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:volume1lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:pagination365-8lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:dateRevised2009-8-4lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2693621-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:year1989lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:articleTitleMethylprednisolone versus metoclopramide as antiemetic treatment in patients receiving adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy: a randomized crossover blind study.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:affiliationDepartment of Oncology, Sharett Institute, Hadassah University Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:publicationTypeClinical Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:publicationTypeRandomized Controlled Triallld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2693621pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed