These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil versus paclitaxel followed by epirubicin and vinorelbine in patients with high-risk operable breast cancer.
    Author: Boccardo F, Amadori D, Guglielmini P, Sismondi P, Farris A, Agostara B, Gambi A, Catalano G, Faedi M, Rubagotti A.
    Journal: Oncology; 2010; 78(3-4):274-81. PubMed ID: 20530973.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer patients with >3 involved nodes (N+) have a poor outcome. Chemotherapy (CT), alone or combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in hormone receptor (HOR)-positive patients, is the standard for these women. However, there are still questions surrounding the optimal adjuvant CT regimen. METHODS: 244 patients with >3 N+ were randomized to receive either four 3-weekly courses of epirubicin (E: 100 mg/m(2), day 1) followed by four 4-weekly cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF: 600, 40, 600 mg/m(2), days 1, 8: n = 122) or four 3-weekly courses of paclitaxel (T: 175 mg/m(2), day 1) followed by four 3-weekly cycles of epirubicin and vinorelbine (E: 75 mg/m(2), day 1; V: 25 mg/m(2), days 1, 8: n = 122). After CT, tamoxifen (plus an LH-RH analog in menstruating women) was given to all HOR-positive patients over a period of 5 years. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end point. Relapse-free survival (RFS) and toxicity were secondary end points. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 102 months (range 3-146), OS and RFS did not differ significantly between groups (E-CMF vs. T-EV: OS, HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59-1.48, p = 0.8; RFS, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57-1.29, p = 0.45). The lack of any difference between assigned treatments was confirmed by multivariate analysis (E-CMF vs. T-EV: RFS, HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.64-1.48, p = 0.9). The 2 regimens showed different toxicity profiles. In fact, significantly more women assigned to E-CMF were affected by stomatitis (p = 0.001) while significantly more women in the T-EV group developed peripheral neuropathy (p < 0.0001) and musculoskeletal disorders (p < 0.0001). However, side effects were moderate and manageable and no toxic death occurred in either arm of the study. CONCLUSIONS: T-EV was safe and moderately toxic but was not superior to E-CMF.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]