Literature DB >> 23771714

Capecitabine plus paclitaxel versus epirubicin plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer: efficacy and safety results of a randomized, phase III trial by the AGO Breast Cancer Study Group.

Hans-Joachim Lück1, Andreas Du Bois, Sibylle Loibl, Iris Schrader, Jens Huober, Volker Heilmann, Matthias Beckmann, Ann Stähler, Christian Jackisch, Michael Hubalek, Barbara Richter, Elmar Stickeler, Holger Eidtmann, Christoph Thomssen, Michael Untch, Kerstin Wollschläger, Tibor Schuster, Gunter von Minckwitz.   

Abstract

Capecitabine/taxane combinations are highly active in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We conducted a randomized, phase III, noninferiority trial comparing capecitabine plus paclitaxel (XP) with epirubicin plus paclitaxel (EP) as first-line therapy for MBC, regarding progression-free survival (PFS) as primary efficacy endpoint. Females who had received no prior chemotherapy for MBC were randomized to six 3-weekly cycles of XP (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d., days 1-14; paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) 3-h infusion, day 1) or EP (epirubicin 60 mg/m(2) 1-h infusion, day 1; paclitaxel as above). Secondary endpoints included response rate, overall survival, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL). Each arm included 170 patients, most of whom received all six cycles as planned. The difference in means of (logarithmic) PFS times (-0.205) did not meet the pre-defined level for noninferiority (-0.186). However, PFS was similar in the two arms [HR: XP vs. EP: 1.012 (95 % CI 0.785-1.304); median 10.4 months XP vs. 9.2 months EP]. Overall survival was also similar [HR 1.027 (95 % CI 0.740-1.424); median 22.0 vs. 26.1 months], and response rate was 47 % versus 42 %. Both regimens were tolerable: there were more grade 3/4 diarrhea and grade 3 hand-foot syndromes with XP and more grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities with EP. There were no major differences in QoL. Although, noninferiority of XP to EP was formally not proven, first-line XP was active and feasible. XP is a valid first-line alternative to anthracycline/taxane regimens, especially in patients previously treated with adjuvant anthracyclines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23771714     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-013-2589-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  7 in total

Review 1.  Taxane acute pain syndrome (TAPS) in patients receiving taxane-based chemotherapy for breast cancer-a systematic review.

Authors:  Ricardo Fernandes; Sasha Mazzarello; Brian Hutton; Risa Shorr; Habeeb Majeed; Mohammed Fk Ibrahim; Carmel Jacobs; Michael Ong; Mark Clemons
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Siao-Nge Hoon; Peter Kh Lau; Alison M White; Max K Bulsara; Patricia D Banks; Andrew D Redfern
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-05-26

3.  Role of taxane and anthracycline combination regimens in the management of advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Authors:  Ruinian Zheng; Shuai Han; Chongyang Duan; Kexu Chen; Zhijian You; Jun Jia; Shunhuan Lin; Liming Liang; Aixue Liu; Huidong Long; Senming Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.889

4.  Comparison of the effectiveness and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens, capecitabine/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide vs 5-fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, followed by adjuvant, capecitabine/docetaxel vs docetaxel, in patients with operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Minmin Zhang; Wei Wei; Jianlun Liu; Huawei Yang; Yi Jiang; Wei Tang; Qiuyun Li; Xiaoming Liao
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Efficacy and safety of capecitabine-based first-line chemotherapy in advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Weijiao Yin; Guangsheng Pei; Gang Liu; Li Huang; Shegan Gao; Xiaoshan Feng
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2015-11-17

6.  Quality of adverse event reporting in phase III randomized controlled trials of breast and colorectal cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Adam S Komorowski; Helen J MacKay; Rossanna C Pezo
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 4.452

7.  Misleading Reporting (Spin) in Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trials in Oncology With Statistically Not Significant Results: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Chiyo Ito; Atsushi Hashimoto; Kohei Uemura; Koji Oba
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-12-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.