Blohmer, J.U., Schmid, Peter, Hilfrich, J., Friese, K., Kleine-Tebbe, A., Koelbl, H., Sommer, H., Morack, G., Wischnewsky, M.B., Lichtenegger, W. and Kuemmel, S. (2010) Epirubicin and cyclophosphamide versus epirubicin and docetaxel as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer: final results of a randomised phase III trial. Annals of Oncology, 21 (7). pp. 1430-1435. ISSN 0923-7534Full text not available from this repository.
Patients and methods: Patients (n = 240) were randomly assigned to receive either ED (epirubicin 75 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2)) or EC (epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.
Results: ORR for patients randomly assigned to receive EC and ED were 42% and 47%, respectively (P = 0.63). Median PFS [10.1 versus 10.3 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; log-rank P = 0.38] and OS (19.9 versus 30.0 months; HR 0.663; log-rank P = 0.21) were comparable in both arms. Although grade 3/4 leucopenia occurred more frequently with ED (81% versus 73%; P = 0.01), there were no significant differences in the incidence of febrile neutropenia and grade 3/4 infections. Grade 3/4 non-haematologic toxicity was infrequent in both arms. Congestive heart failure was observed in one patient in each arm.
Conclusion: In this randomised trial, no differences in the efficacy study end points were observed between the two treatment arms.
|Schools and Departments:||Brighton and Sussex Medical School > Clinical Medicine|
|Subjects:||R Medicine > RC Internal medicine > RC0254 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology Including cancer and carcinogens|
|Depositing User:||Grecia GarciaGarcia|
|Date Deposited:||16 Aug 2011 11:12|
|Last Modified:||30 Nov 2012 16:55|
|Google Scholar:||3 Citations|