Cargando…

Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory. METHODS: Anthracycline-pretreated pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stemmler, H J, diGioia, D, Freier, W, Tessen, H W, Gitsch, G, Jonat, W, Brugger, W, Kettner, E, Abenhardt, W, Tesch, H, Hurtz, H J, Rösel, S, Brudler, O, Heinemann, V
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21407218
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.86
_version_ 1782201260049432576
author Stemmler, H J
diGioia, D
Freier, W
Tessen, H W
Gitsch, G
Jonat, W
Brugger, W
Kettner, E
Abenhardt, W
Tesch, H
Hurtz, H J
Rösel, S
Brudler, O
Heinemann, V
author_facet Stemmler, H J
diGioia, D
Freier, W
Tessen, H W
Gitsch, G
Jonat, W
Brugger, W
Kettner, E
Abenhardt, W
Tesch, H
Hurtz, H J
Rösel, S
Brudler, O
Heinemann, V
author_sort Stemmler, H J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory. METHODS: Anthracycline-pretreated patients were randomly assigned to three gemcitabine-based regimens. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1.000 mg m(−2) plus vinorelbin 25 mg m(−2) on days 1+8 (GemVin), or plus cisplatin 30 mg m(−2) on days 1+8 (GemCis), or plus capecitabine 650 mg m(−2) b.i.d. orally days 1–14 (GemCap), q3w. The primary end point was response rate. RESULTS: A total of 141 patients were recruited on the trial. The overall response rates were 39.0% (GemVin), 47.7% (GemCis) and 34.7% (GemCap). Median progression-free survival was estimated with 5.7, 6.9 and 8.3 months, respectively. Corresponding median survival times were 17.5 (GemVin), 13.0 (GemCis) and 19.4 months (GemCap). Neutropenia ⩾grade 3 occurred in 16.7% (Gem/Vin), 4.4% (GemCis) and 0% (Gem/Cap), whereas non-haematological toxicities were rarely severe except grade 3 hand–foot syndrome in 2.0% of the GemCap patients (per patient analysis). CONCLUSIONS: This randomised phase II trial has revealed comparable results for three gemcitabine-based regimens regarding treatment efficacy and toxicity. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to be a worthwhile treatment option for pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.
format Text
id pubmed-3068513
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30685132012-03-29 Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer Stemmler, H J diGioia, D Freier, W Tessen, H W Gitsch, G Jonat, W Brugger, W Kettner, E Abenhardt, W Tesch, H Hurtz, H J Rösel, S Brudler, O Heinemann, V Br J Cancer Clinical Study BACKGROUND: An increasing proportion of patients are exposed to anthracyclines and/or taxanes in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. Re-exposure in the metastatic stage is limited by drug resistance, thus evaluation of non-cross-resistant regimens is mandatory. METHODS: Anthracycline-pretreated patients were randomly assigned to three gemcitabine-based regimens. Chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1.000 mg m(−2) plus vinorelbin 25 mg m(−2) on days 1+8 (GemVin), or plus cisplatin 30 mg m(−2) on days 1+8 (GemCis), or plus capecitabine 650 mg m(−2) b.i.d. orally days 1–14 (GemCap), q3w. The primary end point was response rate. RESULTS: A total of 141 patients were recruited on the trial. The overall response rates were 39.0% (GemVin), 47.7% (GemCis) and 34.7% (GemCap). Median progression-free survival was estimated with 5.7, 6.9 and 8.3 months, respectively. Corresponding median survival times were 17.5 (GemVin), 13.0 (GemCis) and 19.4 months (GemCap). Neutropenia ⩾grade 3 occurred in 16.7% (Gem/Vin), 4.4% (GemCis) and 0% (Gem/Cap), whereas non-haematological toxicities were rarely severe except grade 3 hand–foot syndrome in 2.0% of the GemCap patients (per patient analysis). CONCLUSIONS: This randomised phase II trial has revealed comparable results for three gemcitabine-based regimens regarding treatment efficacy and toxicity. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to be a worthwhile treatment option for pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. Nature Publishing Group 2011-03-29 2011-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3068513/ /pubmed/21407218 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.86 Text en Copyright © 2011 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Stemmler, H J
diGioia, D
Freier, W
Tessen, H W
Gitsch, G
Jonat, W
Brugger, W
Kettner, E
Abenhardt, W
Tesch, H
Hurtz, H J
Rösel, S
Brudler, O
Heinemann, V
Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title_full Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title_fullStr Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title_full_unstemmed Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title_short Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
title_sort randomised phase ii trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21407218
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.86
work_keys_str_mv AT stemmlerhj randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT digioiad randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT freierw randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT tessenhw randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT gitschg randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT jonatw randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT bruggerw randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT kettnere randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT abenhardtw randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT teschh randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT hurtzhj randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT rosels randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT brudlero randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer
AT heinemannv randomisedphaseiitrialofgemcitabineplusvinorelbinevsgemcitabinepluscisplatinvsgemcitabinepluscapecitabineinpatientswithpretreatedmetastaticbreastcancer