PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and the toxicity of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) and mitomycin C, vincristine, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (MVPF) in patients with metastatic large bowel cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 94 patients with no prior chemotherapy and measurable metastatic large bowel cancer were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment regimens. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) criteria were used to evaluate response and toxicity. RESULTS:Fifty patients were randomized to PF and 44 to MVPF. Toxicity was evaluable in all patients except one; response was evaluable in 40 and 31, with response rate of 13 and 42%, respectively. Intent-to-treat analysis showed a response rate of 12 and 32%, respectively (p = 0.076), where it was assumed that none of the ineligible or unevaluable patients responded. Median survival for all patients was 9 months, with no difference between PF and MVPF. ECOG Performance Status (0 vs. 1), weight loss (< or =10 vs. >10%) and site of metastatic lesion had statistically significant impact on survival. MVPF was definitely more toxic than PF (p < 0.000005). CONCLUSION: Both treatment regimens showed clinical activity. The MVPF regimen resulted in more responses than PF, no improvement in survival, and more toxicity. Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and the toxicity of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (PF) and mitomycin C, vincristine, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (MVPF) in patients with metastatic large bowel cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 94 patients with no prior chemotherapy and measurable metastatic large bowel cancer were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment regimens. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) criteria were used to evaluate response and toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized to PF and 44 to MVPF. Toxicity was evaluable in all patients except one; response was evaluable in 40 and 31, with response rate of 13 and 42%, respectively. Intent-to-treat analysis showed a response rate of 12 and 32%, respectively (p = 0.076), where it was assumed that none of the ineligible or unevaluable patients responded. Median survival for all patients was 9 months, with no difference between PF and MVPF. ECOG Performance Status (0 vs. 1), weight loss (< or =10 vs. >10%) and site of metastatic lesion had statistically significant impact on survival. MVPF was definitely more toxic than PF (p < 0.000005). CONCLUSION: Both treatment regimens showed clinical activity. The MVPF regimen resulted in more responses than PF, no improvement in survival, and more toxicity. Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel