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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |