A randomized phase II non-comparative study of pemetrexed-carboplatin and gemcitabine-vinorelbine in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced breast cancer patients

被引:17
作者
Amadori, Dino [1 ]
Carrasco, Eva [2 ]
Roesel, Siegfried
Labianca, Roberto [3 ]
Uziely, Beatrice [4 ]
Soldatenkova, Victoria [5 ]
Moreau, Valerie [6 ]
Desaiah, Durisala [7 ]
Bauknecht, Thomas [5 ]
Martin, Miguel [8 ]
机构
[1] Romagnolo Sci Inst Study & Treatment Canc, Meldola, Italy
[2] Spanish Breast Canc Res Grp GEICAM, Madrid, Spain
[3] Riuniti Hosp, Bergamo, Italy
[4] Hadassah Hebrew Univ, Med Ctr, Jerusalem, Israel
[5] Lilly Deutschland, Bad Homburg, Germany
[6] Lilly France, Paris, France
[7] Eli Lilly & Co, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
[8] Univ Complutense Madrid, Gregorio Maranon Univ Hosp, Res Inst, Madrid, Spain
关键词
advanced breast cancer patients; combination therapy; pemetrexed-carboplatin and gemcitabine-vinorelbine; response rates; safety and tolerability; SINGLE-AGENT GEMCITABINE; PLUS VINORELBINE; COMBINATION; THERAPY; CHEMOTHERAPY; MONOTHERAPY; PACLITAXEL; CISPLATIN; REGIMEN; TRIAL;
D O I
10.3892/ijo.2013.1869
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Pemetrexed-carboplatin and gemcitabine-vinorelbine combination therapies were efficacious in phase II and phase III studies as first-line breast cancer treatment. Thus, Arm A and Arm B combinations were investigated in patients pretreated with anthracycline and taxanes. Women with advanced breast cancer, with >= 1 measurable lesion per RECIST, were stratified by line of treatment (1st, 2nd), visceral disease (yes/no), ECOG PS (0-1 vs. 2) and randomized 1:1 to Arm A (pemetrexed 600 mg/m(2), D1 i.v. q21; carboplatin, AUC 5, D1 i.v. q21) or Arm B (gemcitabine 1,200 mg/m(2) D1, D8 i.v. q21; vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) D1, D8 i.v. q21). Treatment continued until progression. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (RR). Secondary endpoints were duration of response (DoR), time-to-response (TTR), time-to-progressive disease (TTPD), time-to-treatment failure (TTTF) and safety. A two-stage design was employed independently for each arm. Of 135 randomized patients, 125 (Arm A, n=64; Arm B, n=61) qualified for tumor-response analysis. The mean (standard deviation) number of cycles administered was 6.3 (4.13) in Arm A and 6.2 (4.39) in Arm B. Efficacy in Arm A and Arm B were: RR (95% CI), 26.6 (16.3-39.1) and 29.5 (18.5-42.6); time-to-events (months), DoR 7.7 and 7.5; TTPD, 5.1 and 5.6; TTR, 1.8 and 1.8; TTTF, 4.8 and 5.1; respectively. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events possibly related to study-drug were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia and leucopenia in Arm A and neutropenia, leucopenia and fatigue in Arm B. In this study, both combinations showed moderate activity as predefined RR was not reached and were well tolerated.
引用
收藏
页码:1778 / 1785
页数:8
相关论文
共 45 条
[41]   Single-agent gemcitabine is active in previously treated metastatic breast cancer [J].
Spielmann, M ;
Llombart-Cussac, A ;
Kalla, S ;
Espié, M ;
Namer, M ;
Ferrero, JM ;
Diéras, V ;
Fumoleau, P ;
Cuvier, C ;
Perrocheau, G ;
Ponzio, A ;
Kayitalire, L ;
Pouillart, P .
ONCOLOGY, 2001, 60 (04) :303-307
[42]   Phase II trial of biweekly administration of vinorelbine and gemcitabine in pretreated advanced breast cancer [J].
Stathopoulos, GP ;
Rigatos, SK ;
Pergantas, N ;
Tsavdarides, D ;
Athanasiadis, I ;
Malamos, NA ;
Stathopoulos, JG .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2002, 20 (01) :37-41
[43]   Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine plus vinorelbine vs gemcitabine plus cisplatin vs gemcitabine plus capecitabine in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer [J].
Stemmler, H. J. ;
diGioia, D. ;
Freier, W. ;
Tessen, H. W. ;
Gitsch, G. ;
Jonat, W. ;
Brugger, W. ;
Kettner, E. ;
Abenhardt, W. ;
Tesch, H. ;
Hurtz, H. J. ;
Roesel, S. ;
Brudler, O. ;
Heinemann, V. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2011, 104 (07) :1071-1078
[44]  
Therasse P, 2000, J NATL CANCER I, V92, P205, DOI 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205
[45]   Gemcitabine and vinorelbine in pretreated advanced breast cancer: A pilot study [J].
Valenza, R ;
Leonardi, V ;
Gebbia, V ;
Agostara, B .
ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2000, 11 (04) :495-496