vol1 - Page 345
Page 345
Previous ,
Next ,
Original Image
Return to Index
of these patients had previously failed on Compazine and 6 had
failed on THC capsulesQ I-0-_/ Later the New York program reported
a 93% success rate in 514 evaluable treatment episodes involving
199 patientso 19_/
_. (5) Tennessee Study
DEA fails to note that in Tennessee the overall
success rate _or marijuana of 90.4% was achieved in a population
which had already failed to respond to ollher forms of antiemetic
therapy including oral THCo I-Q2- In add1:lon'1° the Tennessee
program was a randomized study° !9_/
(6) California Study
The only specific observations formulated by DEA
regarding the California program involve the seemingly small.
number of patients #choosing # marijuana as an antiemetic therapy.
DEA also alleges 20% of these patients stopped using marijuana
either because they found the drug was ineffective or because of
severe side effects. As the Alliance notes in its initial briefs
CRAP's restrictive protocols were the reason so few patients were
l_q_/ ACT Official State Reports_ Vol. If, Exhibit 16Br (Minutes
of North Shore University Hospital Research Committee) at l,
106/ Exhibit !6F, #Summary_ at 2_So
!07/ ACT Official State Reports_ Voi. IIs Exhibit 17 at 4_
nAnnual Report: Evaluation of Marijuana and Tetrahydrocannabinol
in the Treatment of Nausea and/or Vomiting Associated with Cancer
Therapy Unresponsive to Conventiona!_Antiemetic Therapy:
Efficacy and Toxicity_ m Board of Phalrmacye State of Tennessee_
July, 1983o
39
Previous ,
Next ,
Return to Index