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

Previous , Next , Return to Index