Literature DB >> 21094038

Are patients in clinical trials representative of the general population? Dose intensity and toxicities associated with FE100C-D chemotherapy in a non-trial population of node positive breast cancer patients compared with PACS-01 trial group.

Judith Fraser1, Nicola Steele, Aysha Al Zaman, Alison Yule.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In our institution, adjuvant taxanes are currently offered to fit, node positive breast cancer patients who are either Her2 positive (any ER/PR) or triple negative (ER/PR/Her2 negative). The FE(100)C-D (FE(100)C × 3→docetaxel 100mg/m(2) × 3) regime, based on the PACS 01 trial [Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential Adjuvant Epirubicin-Based and Docetaxel Chemotherapy for node positive Breast Cancer Patients: The FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5664-5671] is used. We retrospectively audited our experience with FE(100)C-D at The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre and one representative district general hospital (DGH), Falkirk and District Royal Infirmary (FDRI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over a two year period, 101 patients commenced adjuvant FE(100)C-D chemotherapy. Data was matched with the FE(100)C-D arm of the PACS 01 trial.
RESULTS: Median age was 54 years. Twenty-six patients (26%) had ≥ 1 episode of febrile neutropaenia (FN), including one fatal episode. Twenty-nine percent of patients required treatment interruption ≥ 1 week. Thirty percent of patients had dose reductions. Thirty percent of patients received <90% dose intensity of docetaxel.
CONCLUSION: The FN rate was substantially higher and docetaxel dose intensity substantially lower in our unselected sample of patients than in the reference study.(1) This 'real-life' data illustrates the problems of applying clinical trial data to the more generalised patient population.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21094038     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.10.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  11 in total

1.  The high cost of cancer drugs and what we can do about it.

Authors:  Mustaqeem Siddiqui; S Vincent Rajkumar
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 7.616

2.  Feasibility of using a pragmatic trials model to compare two primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis regimens (ciprofloxacin versus G-CSF) in patients receiving docetaxel-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer (REaCT-TC).

Authors:  Mark Clemons; Sasha Mazzarello; John Hilton; Anil Joy; Julie Price-Hiller; Xiaofu Zhu; Shailendra Verma; Anne Kehoe; Mohammed Fk Ibrahim; Marta Sienkiewicz; Carol Stober; Lisa Vandermeer; Brian Hutton; Ranjeeta Mallick; Dean Fergusson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2018-08-11       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 3.  Primary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant TC or FEC-D chemotherapy outside of clinical trial settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tallal Younis; Daniel Rayson; Kara Thompson
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-01-15       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Risk of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving emerging chemotherapy regimens.

Authors:  Derek Weycker; Xiaoyan Li; John Edelsberg; Rich Barron; Alex Kartashov; Hairong Xu; Gary H Lyman
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Characteristics of advanced cancer patients with cancer-related fatigue enrolled in clinical trials and patients referred to outpatient palliative care clinics.

Authors:  Sriram Yennurajalingam; Jung Hun Kang; Huai Yong Cheng; Gary B Chisholm; Jung Hye Kwon; Shana L Palla; Eduardo Bruera
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2012-08-20       Impact factor: 3.612

6.  Real-world impact of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia.

Authors:  A K Altwairgi; W M Hopman; M Mates
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  Febrile neutropenia (FN) and pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in breast cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients receiving high (> 20%) FN-risk chemotherapy: results from a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Jean Paul Salmon; Martin Smakal; Charisios Karanikiotis; Marek Z Wojtukiewicz; Yohann Omnes; Lucy DeCosta; Sally Wetten; James O'Kelly
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Toxicities Associated with Docetaxel-Based Regimens in the Adjuvant Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Real-Life Experience.

Authors:  Elie El Rassy; Marwan Ghosn; Fadi Farhat; Ziad Bakouny; Tarek Assi; Georges Chahine; Fadi Nasr; Fady Ghassan Haddad; Fadi El Karak; Joseph Kattan
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 2.860

9.  Adjuvant Capecitabine With Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide Plus Epirubicin for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (CBCSG010): An Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial.

Authors:  Junjie Li; Keda Yu; Da Pang; Changqin Wang; Jun Jiang; Suisheng Yang; Yunjiang Liu; Peifen Fu; Yuan Sheng; Guojun Zhang; Yali Cao; Qi He; Shude Cui; Xijing Wang; Guosheng Ren; Xinzheng Li; Shiyou Yu; Pengxi Liu; Xiang Qu; Jinhai Tang; Ouchen Wang; Zhimin Fan; Guoqin Jiang; Jin Zhang; Jiandong Wang; Hongwei Zhang; Shui Wang; Jianguo Zhang; Feng Jin; Nanyan Rao; Binlin Ma; Pingqing He; Binghe Xu; Zhigang Zhuang; Jianfeng Wang; Qiang Sun; Xiaofeng Guo; Miao Mo; Zhimin Shao
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  A literature review on the representativeness of randomized controlled trial samples and implications for the external validity of trial results.

Authors:  Tessa Kennedy-Martin; Sarah Curtis; Douglas Faries; Susan Robinson; Joseph Johnston
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.