| Literature DB >> 19936917 |
Yasuo Ohashi1, Toru Watanabe, Muneaki Sano, Hiroki Koyama, Hideo Inaji, Takaichiro Suzuki.
Abstract
Two randomized clinical studies comparing the efficacy of oral UFT (2 years) with that of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) (six courses) have been conducted in patients with resected early breast cancer. We have performed a pooled analysis of these two randomized studies. A pooled analysis was performed using individual patient data from the two trials. Hazard ratios (HRs) were determined with a Cox model stratified by study and adjusted for clinical characteristics. We preplanned to verify the following two hypotheses: UFT is non-inferior to CMF in all patients (hypothesis 1) or in ER-positive patients (hypothesis 2) with respect to relapse-free survival (RFS). Non-inferiority of UFT versus CMF was established if the upper limit of the two-sided confidence interval (CI) of the HR for RFS did not exceed 1.30. Hochberg multiplicity adjustment for the significance level was performed. A total of 1,057 patients were analyzed (CMF, n = 528; UFT, n = 529). Median follow-up time was 5.6 years. The HR for RFS was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.78-1.40) in all patients and 0.79 (97.5% CI, 0.49-1.27) in ER-positive patients. UFT was shown to be non-inferior to CMF in ER-positive patients. An exploratory subgroup analysis showed that RFS was better with UFT than with CMF in ER-positive patients who were 50 years or older (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34-1.01). UFT is non-inferior to CMF in terms of inhibiting recurrence of ER-positive, early breast cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 19936917 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-009-0635-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat ISSN: 0167-6806 Impact factor: 4.872