首页> 外文OA文献 >Randomized phase III trial of adjuvant epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) versus CMF followed by epirubicin in patients with node-negative or 1-3 node-positive rapidly proliferating breast cancer
【2h】

Randomized phase III trial of adjuvant epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) versus CMF followed by epirubicin in patients with node-negative or 1-3 node-positive rapidly proliferating breast cancer

机译:淋巴结阴性或1-3淋巴结阳性快速增生乳腺癌患者中佐剂表柔比星,环磷酰胺,甲氨蝶呤和5-氟尿嘧啶(CMF)与CMF联合表柔比星的III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

Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) have proven highly effective in rapidly proliferating breast cancer (RPBC). It has also been seen that sequential administration of doxorubicin and CMF is superior to their alternation, especially in indolent tumors. In a phase III study, we evaluated whether adjuvant epirubicin (E) followed by CMF is superior to the inverse sequence in RPBC. Patients with node-negative or 1-3 node-positive RPBC (Thymidine Labeling Index > 3% or histological grade 3 or S-phase > 10% or Ki67 > 20%) were randomized to receive E (100 mg/m(2) i.v. d1, q21 days for 4 cycles) followed by CMF (600, 40, 600 mg/m(2) i.v. d1 and 8, q28 days for 4 cycles) (E → CMF) or CMF followed by E (CMF → E) or CMF for 6 cycles. From November 1997 to December 2004, 1066 patients were enrolled: E → CMF 440, CMF → E 438, and CMF 188. At a median follow-up of 69 months, 5-year OS was 91% (95% CI 88-94) for E → CMF and 93% (95% CI 90-95) for CMF → E, with adjusted hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.58-1.35), and DFS was 80% in both arms, with adjusted hazard ratio of 0.99 (95% CI 0.73-1.33, Cox model). Adverse events were similar, apart from a higher rate of neutropenia in the CMF → E arm. No important differences in clinical outcome were observed between the two different sequences, making both a valid option in early breast cancer. Further molecular characterization of the tumors might help to identify subgroups achieving higher benefit from either sequence.
机译:佐剂环磷酰胺,氨甲蝶呤和5-氟尿嘧啶(CMF)已被证明在迅速扩散的乳腺癌(RPBC)中非常有效。还已经发现,阿霉素和CMF的顺序给药优于它们的交替给药,特别是在惰性肿瘤中。在一项III期研究中,我们评估了表柔比星(E)后接CMF的佐剂是否优于RPBC中的反向序列。淋巴结阴性或1-3淋巴结阳性RPBC(胸苷标记指数> 3%或组织学3级或S期> 10%或Ki67> 20%)的患者随机接受E(100 mg / m(2) iv d1,q21天(4个周期),然后是CMF(600、40、600 mg / m(2)iv d1和8,q28天4个周期)(E→CMF)或CMF然后是E(CMF→E)或CMF 6个周期。从1997年11月至2004年12月,共纳入1066例患者:E→CMF 440,CMF→E 438和CMF188。在69个月的中位随访中,五年OS为91%(95%CI 88-94) )(E→CMF)和93%(95%CI 90-95)的CMF→E,调整后的危险比为0.88(95%CI 0.58-1.35),DFS均为80%,调整后的危险比为0.99(95%CI 0.73-1.33,考克斯模型)。不良事件相似,除了CMF→E组中的中性粒细胞减少症发生率更高。在两个不同序列之间没有观察到临床结果的重要差异,这使得两者在早期乳腺癌中都是有效的选择。肿瘤的进一步分子表征可能有助于鉴定从任一序列获得更高益处的亚组。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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