BACKGROUND: It has been reported that a docetaxel-carboplatin combination as first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer showed a level of progression-free survival similar to that of paclitaxel-carboplatin while reducing neurotoxicity and improving quality of life. We investigated the recommended doses of docetaxel-carboplatin in Japanese patients with ovarian cancer and conducted a comparative study of docetaxel-carboplatin versus paclitaxel-carboplatin. METHODS:Thirty-nine patients with ovarian cancer were enrolled in this study and 38 patients were evaluated. We conducted a dose-escalation study using a docetaxel dose of 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5 and 6. In the comparative study, patients received either docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5 or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. Progression-free survival, survival rate at 2 years, response rate, toxicity, and quality of life were investigated. RESULTS: In the dose-finding study, we determined the recommended doses as docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. In the comparative study, the two arms showed similar progression-free survival. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred more frequently in the docetaxel-carboplatin group (84.6%) than in the paclitaxel-carboplatin group (43.8%), while sensory neurotoxicity was less frequent in the docetaxel-carboplatin group (53.8%) than in the paclitaxel-carboplatin (68.8%) group. There were significant differences in the quality-of-life data in favor of docetaxel-carboplatin. CONCLUSION: We determined the recommended doses of docetaxel-carboplatin for Japanese patients with ovarian cancer to be docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. In the comparative study, we suggest that the docetaxel-carboplatin combination is effective and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for Japanese patients with ovarian cancer.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that a docetaxel-carboplatin combination as first-line chemotherapy for ovarian cancer showed a level of progression-free survival similar to that of paclitaxel-carboplatin while reducing neurotoxicity and improving quality of life. We investigated the recommended doses of docetaxel-carboplatin in Japanese patients with ovarian cancer and conducted a comparative study of docetaxel-carboplatin versus paclitaxel-carboplatin. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with ovarian cancer were enrolled in this study and 38 patients were evaluated. We conducted a dose-escalation study using a docetaxel dose of 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5 and 6. In the comparative study, patients received either docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5 or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. Progression-free survival, survival rate at 2 years, response rate, toxicity, and quality of life were investigated. RESULTS: In the dose-finding study, we determined the recommended doses as docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. In the comparative study, the two arms showed similar progression-free survival. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred more frequently in the docetaxel-carboplatin group (84.6%) than in the paclitaxel-carboplatin group (43.8%), while sensory neurotoxicity was less frequent in the docetaxel-carboplatin group (53.8%) than in the paclitaxel-carboplatin (68.8%) group. There were significant differences in the quality-of-life data in favor of docetaxel-carboplatin. CONCLUSION: We determined the recommended doses of docetaxel-carboplatin for Japanese patients with ovarian cancer to be docetaxel 70 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 5. In the comparative study, we suggest that the docetaxel-carboplatin combination is effective and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for Japanese patients with ovarian cancer.
Authors: G J Rustin; A E Nelstrop; P McClean; M F Brady; W P McGuire; W J Hoskins; H Mitchell; H E Lambert Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M J Piccart; K Bertelsen; K James; J Cassidy; C Mangioni; E Simonsen; G Stuart; S Kaye; I Vergote; R Blom; R Grimshaw; R J Atkinson; K D Swenerton; C Trope; M Nardi; J Kaern; S Tumolo; P Timmers; J A Roy; F Lhoas; B Lindvall; M Bacon; A Birt; J E Andersen; B Zee; J Paul; B Baron; S Pecorelli Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-05-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: D F Cella; D S Tulsky; G Gray; B Sarafian; E Linn; A Bonomi; M Silberman; S B Yellen; P Winicour; J Brannon Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: W W ten Bokkel Huinink; A M Prove; M Piccart; W Steward; T Tursz; J Wanders; H Franklin; M Clavel; J Verweij; M Alakl Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: G Catimel; J Verweij; V Mattijssen; A Hanauske; M Piccart; J Wanders; H Franklin; N Le Bail; M Clavel; S B Kaye Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Paul A Vasey; Gordon C Jayson; Alan Gordon; Hani Gabra; Rob Coleman; Ronnie Atkinson; David Parkin; James Paul; Andrea Hay; Stan B Kaye Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-11-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: A Sulkes; J Smyth; C Sessa; L Y Dirix; J B Vermorken; S Kaye; J Wanders; H Franklin; N LeBail; J Verweij Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 1994-08 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: T Cerny; S Kaplan; N Pavlidis; P Schöffski; R Epelbaum; J van Meerbeek; J Wanders; H R Franklin; S Kaye Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 1994-08 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Chen-Yu Huang; Min Cheng; Na-Rong Lee; Hsin-Yi Huang; Wen-Ling Lee; Wen-Hsun Chang; Peng-Hui Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 3.390