首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Journal of Cancer >Phase II randomised trial of raltitrexed–oxaliplatin vs raltitrexed–irinotecan as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer
【2h】

Phase II randomised trial of raltitrexed–oxaliplatin vs raltitrexed–irinotecan as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer

机译:雷替曲沙加-奥沙利铂与雷替曲沙-伊立替康作为晚期大肠癌的一线治疗的II期随机试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The purpose of this phase II randomised trial was to determine which of two schemes, raltitrexed-irinotecan or raltitrexed-oxaliplatin, offered better activity and less toxicity in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). A total of 94 patients with previously untreated metastatic CRC were included and randomised to receive raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 followed by oxaliplatin 130 mg m−2 on day 1 (arm A), or CPT-11 350 mg m−2 followed by raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 (arm B). In both arms treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed an overall response rate of 46% (95% CI, 29.5–57.7%) for arm A, and 34% (95% CI, 19.8–48.4%) for arm B. Median time to progression was 8.2 months for arm A and 8.8 months for arm B. After a median follow-up of 14 months, 69% of patients included in arm A were still alive, compared to 59% of those included in arm B. Overall, 31 patients (65%) experienced some episode of toxicity in arm A and 32 patients (70%) in arm B, usually grade 1–2. The most common toxicity was hepatic, with 29 patients (60%) in arm A and 24 patients (62%) in arm B, and was grade 3–4 in four (8%) and four (9%) patients, respectively. In all, 14 patients (29%) from arm A and 24 patients (52%) from arm B had some grade of diarrhoea (P<0.03). Neurologic toxicity was observed in 31 patients (64%) in arm A, and was grade 3–4 in five patients (10%), while a cholinergic syndrome was detected in nine patients (19%) in arm B. There were no differences in haematologic toxicity. One toxic death (2%) occurred in arm A and three (6.5%) in arm B. In conclusion, both schemes have high efficacy as first-line treatment in metastatic CRC and their total toxicity levels are similar. Regimens with raltitrexed seem a reasonable alternative to fluoropyrimidines.
机译:这项II期随机试验的目的是确定雷珠单抗-伊立替康或雷珠单抗-奥沙利铂这两种方案在晚期结直肠癌(CRC)患者中提供更好的活性和更低的毒性。纳入总共94例先前未接受过治疗的转移性CRC患者,并在第1天随机接受雷替曲塞3 mg m -2 ,然后接受奥沙利铂130 mg m -2 (A组) )或CPT-11 350 mg m −2 ,然后拉立特雷司3 mg m −2 (臂B)。每两周重复两次治疗。意向性治疗(ITT)分析显示,手臂A的总体缓解率为46%(95%CI,29.5–57.7%),而手臂B为34%(95%CI,19.8–48.4%)。 A组的平均进展时间为8.2个月,B组的平均进展时间为8.8个月。在平均随访14个月后,A组中包括的患者中仍有69%仍然存活,而B组中包括的患者则仍然有59%。 31例(65%)的患者在A组中发生了某种毒性发作,而32例(70%)在B组中发生了毒性发作,通常为1-2级。最常见的毒性是肝毒性,A组为29例患者(60%),B组为24例患者(62%),分别在4例(8%)和4例(9%)患者中为3-4级。总共有14例A组患者(29%)和24例B组患者(52%)有一定程度的腹泻(P <0.03)。 A组的31例患者(64%)观察到神经毒性,5例(10%)的神经毒性为3–4级,B组9例(19%)的患者发现了胆碱能综合征。血液学毒性。 A组发生1例中毒死亡(2%),B组发生3例(6.5%)。总之,这两种方案作为转移性CRC的一线治疗均具有很高的疗效,其总毒性水平相似。雷替曲沙的治疗方案似乎是氟嘧啶的合理替代品。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号