Efficacy of maropitant for treatment and prevention of emesis caused by intravenous infusion of cisplatin in dogs

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of maropitant, a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, to treat and prevent emesis caused by IV infusion of a chemotherapeutic dose of cisplatin (70 mg/m(2)) in dogs. ANIMALS: 64 healthy 6-month-old Beagles (32 males and 32 females). PROCEDURES: To evaluate the effect of maropitant on ongoing emesis, 24 dogs were randomized to 2 treatment groups (12 dogs each). Saline (0.9% NaCl) solution or maropitant (1 mg/kg) was administered once by SC injection immediately following the first emetic event after cisplatin infusion. Dogs were assessed for emesis for 6 hours after initiation of cisplatin infusion. To evaluate the use of maropitant for the prevention of emesis, 40 dogs were randomized to 4 treatment groups (10 dogs each). Placebo or maropitant (1, 2, or 3 mg/kg) was administered PO as a tablet. Cisplatin infusion was initiated at 19 hours after treatment, and dogs were assessed for emesis for 6 hours. RESULTS: No treatment-related adverse events were observed in either study. For the treatment of ongoing emesis, significantly fewer emetic events were observed for maropitant-treated dogs, compared with placebo-treated dogs (mean, 5.2 vs 15.8), and the mean time to cessation of emesis was significantly shorter (0.65 vs 1.65 hours). In the prevention of emesis, maropitant-treated dogs had significantly fewer emetic events (means, 2.7, 1.1, and 0.5 for maropitant at 1, 2, and 3 mg/kg, respectively), compared with placebo-treated dogs (mean, 20.3). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that maropitant is safe and effective in the treatment and prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis in dogs.     

Comparative efficacy of metoclopramide,ondansetron and maropitant in preventing parvoviral enteritis‐induced emesis in dogs

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficiencies of selected anti‐emetic drugs (metoclopramide, ondansetron and maropitant) in preventing vomiting in the treatment of canine parvoviral enteritis. We designed a randomized, prospective clinical study. PVE quick ELISA test‐positive dogs between 4 and 12 months of age were included in the study. Each of metoclopramide, ondansetron, maropitant and control group had 8 dogs. Metoclopramide and ondansetron were administered as 0.5 mg/kg doses three times a day via intravenous route, and maropitant was administered as 1 mg/kg doses once a day subcutaneously. The number and severity of daily vomitings were recorded. All dogs were treated and monitored for five days; treatments were continued until all animals healed. Metoclopramide, ondansetron and maropitant decreased the severity of vomiting from the first day and the vomiting numbers from the third day in PVE treatment. Obtained results showed that maropitant can be used successfully such as metoclopramide and ondansetron, which are frequently used for PVE treatment. At the same time, it was discovered that metoclopramide, ondansetron and maropitant were equally effective in reducing the frequency and severity of vomiting.     

Safety and efficacy of injectable and oral maropitant,a selective neurokinin1 receptor antagonist,in a randomized clinical trial for treatment of vomiting in dogs

Maropitant (Cerenia?), a selective neurokinin₁ receptor antagonist, was evaluated for safety and efficacy in treatment and prevention of acute vomiting due to various etiologies in dogs in a randomized clinical trial. Two‐hundred seventy‐eight dogs were enrolled from 29 veterinary hospitals. Two‐hundred fifty‐two were evaluable for efficacy, while 275 were evaluable for safety. A randomized block design was utilized (three maropitant‐ and one placebo‐treated dog per block). Initial treatment was maropitant at 1 mg/kg body weight (0.45 mg/lb) or an equivalent volume of saline (placebo) administered subcutaneously. On the subsequent 1 to 4 days, maropitant or placebo (dependent on allocation) was administered subcutaneously or orally at approximate 24‐h intervals as needed. Oral doses were administered as maropitant tablets using unit dosing to deliver a minimum dose of 2 mg/kg body weight (0.9 mg/lb) or equivalent numbers of similar placebo tablets. Dogs and housing were observed twice daily for evidence of vomiting. Emesis was significantly (P ≤ 0.0012) reduced in maropitant‐treated dogs as 50% (32/64) of placebo‐treated dogs continued to vomit compared to only 21.8% (41/188) of maropitant‐treated dogs. Post‐treatment clinical signs were consistent with clinical diagnoses and judged not to be treatment related. In this clinical trial, maropitant was safe and effective in reducing emesis due to various etiologies in dogs.     

Comparative efficacy of maropitant and selected drugs in preventing emesis induced by centrally or peripherally acting emetogens in dogs

Maropitant (Cerenia^?; a novel, selective neurokinin₁ receptor antagonist), chlorpromazine, metoclopramide and ondansetron were compared in two randomized, placebo‐controlled studies for efficacy in preventing emesis induced by emetogens acting centrally (apomorphine; Study 1) or peripherally (syrup of ipecac; Study 2) in dogs. In each study, ten male and ten female beagles were treated in a five‐treatment, five‐period crossover design. The five treatments were 0.9% saline (0.1 mL/kg), maropitant (1 mg/kg), metoclopramide (0.5 mg/kg), or chlorpromazine (0.5 mg/kg) all administered subcutaneously, or ondansetron (0.5 mg/kg) administered intravenously. One hour posttreatment dogs were challenged with apomorphine at 0.1 mg/kg intravenously (Study 1) or syrup of ipecac at 0.5 mL/kg orally (Study 2). Following emetogen challenge, dogs were observed for 30 min (Study 1) or 1 h (Study 2) for emesis. No clinical signs, other than those related to emesis, were observed. Efficacy of maropitant in preventing emesis induced centrally by apomorphine was not different (P > 0.05) from metoclopramide or chlorpromazine but was superior (P < 0.0001) to ondansetron. Efficacy of maropitant in preventing emesis induced by syrup of ipecac was not different (P > 0.05) from ondansetron but was superior (P ≤ 0.0102) to metoclopramide or chlorpromazine. Maropitant was effective (P < 0.0001 relative to control) in preventing vomiting caused by stimulation of either central or peripheral emetic pathways, whereas the other drugs examined prevented vomiting caused by central (metoclopramide and chlorpromazine; P < 0.0001) or peripheral (ondansetron; P < 0.0001) stimulation but not both.     

Efficacy of injectable maropitant (Cerenia™) in a randomized clinical trial for prevention and treatment of cisplatin-induced emesis in dogs presented as veterinary patients

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a common side‐effect of cisplatin therapy. Maropitant (Cerenia?), a novel neurokinin‐1 receptor antagonist, was evaluated for prevention and treatment of cisplatin‐induced emesis in tumour‐bearing dogs. Dogs (n= 122) were randomly allocated to three treatment groups: T01, placebo before and after cisplatin; T02, placebo before and maropitant after cisplatin; or T03, maropitant before and placebo after cisplatin. Maropitant treatment (T02) following a cisplatin‐induced‐emetic event resulted in significantly fewer subsequent emetic events (P= 0.0005) than in placebo‐treated dogs (T01). In placebo‐treated (T01) dogs, 56.4% were withdrawn from the study because of treatment failure compared with 5.3% in group T02. When maropitant was administered prior to cisplatin treatment (T03) in a prevention regime, 94.9% did not vomit compared with only 4.9% of placebo‐treated dogs, and significantly fewer emetic events (P < 0.0001) were observed in those dogs that did vomit. In summary, maropitant was safe and highly effective in reducing or completely preventing cisplatin‐induced emesis.     

Efficacy and safety of cefovecin (Convenia) for the treatment of urinary tract infections in dogs

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of cefovecin (Convenia); Pfizer Animal Health) in the treatment of urinary tract infections in dogs. METHODS: A multi-centre, blinded, randomised study was conducted in 129 dogs with urinary tract infections. Cephalexin (Rilexine) administered twice daily at 15 mg/kg bodyweight orally for 14 days was compared with a single, subcutaneous injection of cefovecin (Convenia) in dogs. The primary efficacy parameter assessed was bacterial elimination of the pretreatment uropathogen. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine dogs were included in efficacy assessments. Escherichia coli was eliminated in 90.5 per cent of cefovecin-treated dogs compared with 52.9 per cent of cephalexin-treated dogs (P=0.0004). Overall cure rates for dogs with Escherichia coli infections were 79.1 per cent for cefovecin and 36.4 per cent for cephalexin-treated dogs (P=0.0003). There were no suspected adverse drug reactions attributed to treatment with cefovecin or cephalexin. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Cefovecin was shown to be an effective and safe treatment for urinary tract infections.     

Clinical efficacy and safety of cefovecin in the treatment of canine pyoderma and wound infections

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of cefovecin in the treatment of bacterial skin infections in dogs. METHOD: Dogs with superficial or deep pyoderma or wounds/abscesses were enrolled in three separate studies. Dogs (354) were randomised to treatment and received either cefovecin administered by subcutaneous injection at 14 day intervals, as clinically necessary, or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid as oral tablets twice daily for 14 days. Courses of treatment were repeated at 14 day intervals up to a total of four courses. Clinicians responsible for assessing lesions were masked to treatment allocation. Only animals where the presence of a pretreatment bacterial pathogen was confirmed were included in the analysis of efficacy. Cases were evaluated for clinical efficacy at 28 days after initiation of the final course of treatment. Clinical efficacy was assessed by scoring the clinical signs typical of skin infections. RESULTS: Cefovecin demonstrated statistical non-inferiority compared with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid for all three clinical diagnoses; for cefovecin, up to 96.9 per cent efficacy was observed versus 92.5 per cent for amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Cefovecin was shown to be as effective as amoxicillin/clavulanic acid administered orally in the treatment of bacterial skin infections in dogs. Cefovecin offers the additional benefit of eliminating owner non-compliance.     

The pharmacokinetics of maropitant, a novel neurokinin type-1 receptor antagonist, in dogs

Maropitant is the first NK1 receptor antagonist developed to treat and prevent emesis in dogs; it is administered by subcutaneous (s.c.) injection at 1 mg/kg, or orally (p.o.), in tablet form, at either 2 or 8 mg/kg depending on indication. The absolute bioavailability of maropitant was markedly higher (90.7%) following s.c. injection than after oral administration (23.7% at the 2 mg/kg dose and 37.0% at the 8 mg/kg dose). First-pass metabolism contributes to the low bioavailability of maropitant following oral administration. The difference in bioavailability between the two oral doses reflects the nonlinear kinetics characterizing the disposition of maropitant within the 2-8 mg/kg dose range. Systemic clearance of maropitant following intravenous (i.v.) administration was 970, 995 and 533 mL/h.kg at doses of 1, 2 and 8 mg/kg, respectively. Nonproportional kinetics were observed for p.o. administered maropitant at doses ranging from 2 to 16 mg/kg but dose proportionality was demonstrated at higher doses (20-50 mg/kg). Linearity was also demonstrated following s.c. administration at 0.5, 1 and 2 mg/kg. Maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) occurred 0.75 h (tmax) after s.c. administration at 1 mg/kg, and at 1.7 and 1.9 h after oral administration of 8 and 2 mg/kg doses, respectively. The apparent terminal half-life of maropitant was 7.75, 4.03 and 5.46 h after dosing at 1 mg/kg (s.c.), 2 mg/kg (p.o.) and 8 mg/kg (p.o.), respectively. Feeding status had no effect on oral bioavailability. Limited accumulation occurred following once-daily administration of maropitant for five consecutive days at 1 mg/kg (s.c.) or 2 mg/kg (p.o.). At the dose of 8 mg/kg (p.o.) once daily for two consecutive days, the mean AUC(0-24h) (second dose) was 218% that of the first dose value. Urinary recovery of maropitant and its main metabolite was minimal (<1%), thus supporting the evidence that maropitant clearance is primarily hepatic.     

Safety, pharmacokinetics and use of the novel NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant (Cerenia) for the prevention of emesis and motion sickness in cats

The present study characterizes the safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-emetic effects of the selective NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant in the cat. Safety of maropitant was determined following 15 days of subcutaneous (SC) administration at 0.5–5 mg/kg. Maropitant was well tolerated in cats at doses that exceeded the efficacious anti-emetic dose range of the drug by at least a factor of 10 and adverse clinical signs or pathological safety findings were not noted at any dose.The pharmacokinetics of maropitant in cats were determined following single dose oral (PO), intravenous (IV) and SC administration. Maropitant had a terminal half-life of 13–17 h and a bioavailability of 50 and 117% when administered PO and SC, respectively. Efficacy was determined against emesis induced either by xylazine or by motion. A dosage of 1 mg/kg maropitant administered IV, SC or PO prevented emesis elicited by xylazine. The compound had good oral antiemetic activity and a long (24 h) duration of action. Maropitant (1.0 mg/kg) was highly effective in preventing motion-induced emesis in cats. These studies indicate that the NK-1 receptor antagonist maropitant is well tolerated, safe and has excellent anti-emetic properties in cats.     

Reduced dosage of ketoprofen for the short-term and long-term treatment of joint pain in dogs

Two studies were conducted under laboratory conditions with 16 dogs to investigate the analgesic effectiveness of a low dose of ketoprofen in a short-term sodium urate crystal-induced synovitis model of arthritis. The effect of the treatment, defined as the improvement in peak vertical force weight bearing was evaluated in the first study at three dose levels. A single oral dose of 0.25 mg/kg ketoprofen was significantly better (P < 0.01) than the control (0 mg), but doses of 0.5 and 0.75 mg/kg did not improve the dogs' weight bearing further. The second study investigated the efficacy and safety of the 0.25 mg/kg dose administered daily for 30 days. The beneficial effects of ketoprofen at this dose were constant, with the treated dogs bearing 89.1 per cent of the baseline vertical force four hours after the induction of arthritis on day 1 and 92.2 per cent on day 29, compared with 42 per cent and 34 per cent of the baseline in the untreated dogs. No gastrointestinal or other side effects were observed during the treatment.     

Results of non-selective adrenocorticolysis by o,p'-DDD in 129 dogs with pituitary-dependent hyperadrenocorticism

One hundred and twenty-nine dogs with pituitary-dependent hyperadrenocorticism were treated according to a protocol aimed at the complete destruction of the adrenal cortices by the administration of o,p'-DDD (mitotane) at a daily dose of 50 to 75 mg/kg bodyweight for 25 days. On the third day, glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid supplementation was begun for the induced adrenocortical insufficiency. The first followup examination after completion of the 25-day course and the subsequent twice-yearly follow-up examinations included physical examination and measurements of plasma concentrations of sodium and potassium to optimise substitution therapy. In 19 dogs the full course of 25 days treatment could not be completed. Of the 110 dogs which received the full course of treatment, the administration had to be stopped temporarily in 32 because of side-effects, such as anorexia and vomiting. The actual dose of o,p'-DDD administered was not significantly different in the dogs with and without these side-effects. Clinical remission occurred in 111 dogs (86 per cent), of which 43 (39 per cent) had a relapse. The estimated one-year disease-free fraction was 77 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval [CI]: 67 to 85 per cent). The estimated one-year survival fraction was 80 per cent (95 per cent CI: 71 to 87 per cent), the two-year survival was 69 per cent (95 per cent CI: 59 to 78 per cent), and the three-year survival was 61 per cent (95 per cent CI: 49 to 71 per cent). The bodyweight and age of the dog, and vomiting occurring during the period of treatment, were positively correlated with the length of the disease-free period, whereas weakness during the treatment and resistance to dexamethasone suppression of the urinary corticoid/creatinine ratios at the start of the treatment were associated with a relatively short survival time.     

Efficacy and safet of pimobendan in canine heart failure caused by myxomatous mitral valve disease

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of pimobendan by comparing it with ramipril over a six-month period in dogs with mild to moderate heart failure (HF) caused by myxomatous mitral valve disease (MMVD). METHODS: This was a prospective randomised, single-blind, parallel-group trial. Client-owned dogs (n = 43) with mild to moderate HF caused by MMVD were randomly assigned to one of two groups, which received either pimobendan (P dogs) or ramipril (R dogs) for six months. The outcome measures studied were: adverse HF outcome, defined as failure to complete the trial as a direct consequence of HF; maximum furosemide dose (mg/kg/day) administered during the study period; and any requirement for additional visits to the clinic as a direct consequence of HF. RESULTS: Treatment with pimobendan was well tolerated compared with treatment with ramipril. P dogs were 25 per cent as likely as R dogs to have an adverse HF outcome (odds ratio 4.09, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.03 to 16.3, P = 0.046). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: R dogs had a higher overall score and thus may have had more advanced disease than P dogs at baseline (P = 0.04). These results should be interpreted cautiously but such a high odds ratio warrants further investigation.     

Thirteen-week dose-intensifying simultaneous combination chemotherapy protocol for malignant lymphoma in dogs

This prospective study aimed to record the toxicity profile of a dose-intensifying simultaneous chemotherapy (DISC) protocol for lymphoma in dogs. Remission rates and the duration of the protocol were also evaluated. Twenty-one dogs were studied. Diagnosis was based on cytological or histological assessments. The DISC protocol is a 13-week maintenance-free protocol. L-Asparaginase (400 iu/kg) was administered subcutaneously on day 1, followed by weekly simultaneous intravenous administration of vincristine (0.7 mg/m(2) = 100 per cent), cyclophosphamide (200 mg/m(2) = 100 per cent) and doxorubicin (30 mg/m(2) = 100 per cent) at a starting dose level of 33 per cent. Dose levels were given twice and then increased by 5 to 7 per cent if grade 0 or I toxicities were seen, to a maximum dose level of 60 per cent. Two dogs experienced a grade IV toxicity (asymptomatic neutropenia in one dog and sepsis in the other). Two episodes of asymptomatic grade III thrombocytopenia and one episode of neutropenia were recorded. Other toxic events were infrequent and mild. Only one dog required hospitalisation for less than 72 hours. Seventeen dogs (80.9 per cent) achieved complete remission, one (4.8 per cent) achieved partial remission, two (9.5 per cent) had stable disease and in one (4.8 per cent) disease progressed.     

The safety of dirlotapide in dogs

The safety of dirlotapide in dogs was evaluated in two studies with parallel designs. In an acute tolerance study, 24 beagles (six dogs per treatment) were treated orally once daily for 14 days with placebo or dirlotapide at 2.5, 5.0, or 10.0 mg/kg/day. In a margin-of-safety study, 38 overweight, neutered beagles were treated orally once daily for 3 months with dirlotapide at doses up to 0.5 mg/kg/day (six dogs), 1.5 mg/kg/day (12 dogs) and 2.5 mg/kg/day (six dogs). Control dogs received placebo at 0.3 mL/kg/day (10 dogs) and 0.5 mL/kg/day (four dogs). Results were similar for both studies, and no serious adverse events were observed. Dirlotapide was clinically well-tolerated in dogs at dosages up to 10 mg/kg/day for 14 days and 2.5 mg/kg/day for 3 months. Dirlotapide produced the expected decrease in food intake and body weight (up to 20–40%) without ill effects. Clinical, pathologic, and histopathologic findings were reversible and consistent with suppression of food intake and rapid weight loss produced by elevated dirlotapide dosages. In both studies, sporadic emesis and loose stools were observed in both placebo and dirlotapide-treated dogs. Incidence of emesis generally increased with dose and decreased with treatment time. Elevations in hepatic transaminase activity were seen in dogs treated with more than 1.5 mg/kg dirlotapide daily, but were not associated with clinical signs or microscopic evidence of hepatic degeneration or necrosis.     

Effect of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) on leukocyte count and survival rate of dogs with parvoviral enteritis.

Dogs with clinical signs consistent with parvoviral enteritis and leukopenia (total leukocyte count < 5.0 x 10(9) l(-1)) were included in this randomised double-blind study (treatment group: n = 22; control group: n = 21). The dogs in the treatment group received a subcutaneous daily injection of 10 microg kg(-1) of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) for 5 days. Clinical and blood investigations were performed prior to the first injection, daily during the treatment period and on the day after treatment ended, and then once more, 26 days after the first injection. During the study, no significant differences were found between the two groups with respect to survival rate (treatment group: 68 per cent; control group: 71 per cent, P > 0 4, Fisher-Test) and other clinical findings. Similarly the total leukocyte count, neutrophil count and other haematologic and biochemical parameters did not differ significantly between the groups, based on differences from initial values (P > 0 05). Consequently, the use of rhG-CSF in the treatment of dogs with parvoviral enteritis cannot be recommended.     

Efficacy of maropitant in the prevention of delayed vomiting associated with administration of doxorubicin to dogs

Background: Vomiting, nausea, inappetence, and diarrhea are common delayed adverse effects of doxorubicin. Maropitant, a neurokinin‐1 receptor antagonist, is known to prevent acute vomiting in dogs receiving cisplatin. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of maropitant in preventing delayed vomiting after administration of doxorubicin to dogs. Animals: Fifty‐nine dogs with cancer. Methods: This randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study used a cross‐over design. Dogs were randomized into 1 of 2 treatment groups. Group A received maropitant after the 1st doxorubicin, and placebo after the 2nd. Group B received placebo first, and maropitant second. Maropitant (2 mg/kg) or placebo tablets were administered PO for 5 days after doxorubicin treatment. Owners completed visual analog scales based on Veterinary Cooperative Oncology Group‐Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events to grade their pet's clinical signs during the week after administration of doxorubicin. Statistical differences in gastrointestinal toxicosis and myelosuppression between maropitant and placebo treatments were evaluated. Results: Significantly fewer dogs had vomiting (P= .001) or diarrhea (P= .041), and the severity of vomiting (P < .001) and diarrhea (P= .024) was less the week after doxorubicin when receiving maropitant compared with placebo. No differences were found between maropitant and placebo for other gastrointestinal and bone marrow toxicoses. Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Maropitant is effective in preventing delayed vomiting induced by doxorubicin. Its prophylactic use might improve quality of life and decrease the need for dose reductions in certain dogs.     

Efficacy of daily amitraz on generalised demodicosis in dogs

Fifty dogs with generalised demodicosis were treated with daily applications of 0·125 per cent amitraz solution over half the body. This was applied once a day, alternating the body half treated. Nine dogs were lost to follow-up; the remaining dogs were classified as either a success (25 dogs, 61 per cent) or a failure (16 dogs, 39 per cent) according to their response to treatment. Eight of the failures were due to persistent demodicosis and eight relapsed within one year after treatment. All eight of the relapsed dogs were cured after a second course of daily amitraz treatment. For the 25 dogs considered treatment successes, the median duration of treatment was 6·5 weeks (range, three weeks to nine months), and the median interval from completion of treatment to last post treatment evaluation was 3·4 years (range, two to four-and-a-half-years). Including the eight dogs that were cured after retreatment, the daily amitraz applications were curative in 33 of 41 dogs (80 per cent) with generalised demodicosis.     

Evaluation of a human generic formulation of ciclosporin in the treatment of canine atopic dermatitis with in vitro assessment of the functional capacity of phagocytic cells

To compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of a generic formulation of ciclosporin for human beings with prednisone in the treatment of canine atopic dermatitis), human generic ciclosporin A (hgCsA) (5 mg/kg daily) and prednisone (1 mg/kg daily for seven days, followed by 1 mg/kg every second day) were administered to 13 and seven dogs with atopic dermatitis, respectively, for 42 days. Skin changes were assessed using a modified canine atopic dermatitis extent and severity index (mCADESI-01) and a pruritus intensity scale system. The in vitro functional capacity of phagocytic cells was assessed using the tetrazolium reductase activity and zymosan-stimulated tetrazolium reductase activity tests, as well as measurements of the percentage phagocytic activity and the ingestion capacity of phagocytic cells. Haematological and biochemical parameters were also monitored. There was a greater than or equal to 50 per cent reduction from the baseline in mCADESI-01 scores in 84.6 and 100 per cent of dogs, and a greater than or equal to 50 per cent reduction from the baseline in pruritus scores in 76.9 and 85.7 per cent of dogs, treated with hgCsA and prednisone, respectively. No important adverse physical, haematological or biochemical effects occurred with either drug and no statistically significant changes were detected in any of the four tests assessing the functional activity of phagocytes. The generic formulation of ciclosporin was effective in reducing the severity of physical signs of canine atopic dermatitis and was well tolerated.     

Clindamycin hydrochloride and clavulanate-amoxycillin in the treatment of canine superficial pyoderma.

A masked, randomised, controlled clinical trial for the treatment of canine superficial pyoderma was undertaken. Dogs with a clinical diagnosis of superficial pyoderma, supported by bacterial culture were admitted to the trial and randomly assigned to treatment with either clindamycin hydrochloride at 5.5 mg/kg twice daily or clavulanate-amoxycillin at 12.5 mg/kg twice daily. After 21 days the animals were re-assessed, and therapy was continued for a further 21 days in the dogs with persistent lesions if bacterial culture demonstrated continued sensitivity. Twenty-nine dogs were treated with clindamycin hydrochloride and 27 with clavulanate-amoxycillin. Complete cure was obtained after three weeks in 17 (59 per cent) of the clindamycin-treated cases, but in only eight (30 per cent) of the clavulanate-amoxycillin treated group. Clindamycin was significantly more effective than clavulanate-amoxycillin for the treatment of superficial pyoderma in dogs.     

Efficacy and safety of maropitant,a selective neurokinin1 receptor antagonist,in two randomized clinical trials for prevention of vomiting due to motion sickness in dogs

Maropitant (Cerenia^TM), a selective neurokinin₁ receptor antagonist, was evaluated for efficacy and safety in prevention of vomiting due to motion sickness in dogs in two randomized clinical trials. One‐hundred eighty‐nine dogs with a history of motion sickness were enrolled at 26 veterinary clinics (across 12 US states) across the two trials; of these, 163 were fully evaluable, 19 were evaluable only for safety, and seven were not evaluable. Each trial used a two‐period crossover design. Each dog was treated orally with placebo or maropitant (minimum dose of 8 mg/kg body weight using unit dosing) tablets at approximately 2 h (Trial 1) or 10 h (Trial 2) before an automobile ride of approximately 60 min, during which dogs were observed for signs of motion sickness. Following a 10–14‐day washout period, each dog was administered the opposite treatment and taken for another journey (same route, driver and vehicle). Maropitant reduced the occurrence of vomiting compared to placebo by 86.1% or 76.5% when given approximately 2 or 10 h prior to travel, respectively. No significant clinical signs were observed after maropitant treatment. Maropitant was safe and effective in preventing vomiting due to motion sickness in dogs when administered at a minimum dose of 8 mg/kg body weight as oral tablets 2 or 10 h prior to travel.