Suppr超能文献

在先前未经治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者中,低剂量推注氟尿嘧啶加亚叶酸钙与伊立替康,或持续输注氟尿嘧啶加亚叶酸钙与奥沙利铂的随机对照试验:一项北美协作组试验

Randomized controlled trial of reduced-dose bolus fluorouracil plus leucovorin and irinotecan or infused fluorouracil plus leucovorin and oxaliplatin in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a North American Intergroup Trial.

作者信息

Goldberg Richard M, Sargent Daniel J, Morton Roscoe F, Fuchs Charles S, Ramanathan Ramesh K, Williamson Stephen K, Findlay Brian P, Pitot Henry C, Alberts Steven

机构信息

Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB # 7305, 3009 Old Clinic Bldg, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jul 20;24(21):3347-53. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.1317.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Previously, we reported results of Intergroup N9741, which compared standard bolus fluorouracil (FU), leucovorin, plus irinotecan (IFL) with infused FU, leucovorin, plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) and irinotecan plus oxaliplatin in patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. High rates of grade > or = 3 toxicity on IFL (resulting in some deaths) led us to reduce the starting doses of both irinotecan and FU by 20% (rIFL). This article compares rIFL with FOLFOX4.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The primary comparison was time to progression, with secondary end points of response rate (RR), overall survival, and toxicity.

RESULTS

Three hundred five patients were randomly assigned. The North Central Cancer Treatment Group Data Safety Monitoring Committee interrupted enrollment at a planned interim analysis when outcomes crossed predetermined stopping boundaries. The results were significantly superior for FOLFOX4 compared with rIFL for time to progression (9.7 v 5.5 months, respectively; P < .0001), RR (48% v 32%, respectively; P = .006), and overall survival (19.0 v 16.3 months, respectively; P = .026). Toxicity profiles were not significantly different between regimens for nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, dehydration, or 60-day all-cause mortality. Sensory neuropathy and neutropenia were significantly more common with FOLFOX4. Approximately 75% of patients in both arms received second-line therapy; 58% of rIFL patients received oxaliplatin-based second-line therapy, and 55% of FOLFOX4 patients received irinotecan-based regimens as second-line therapy.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOX4 led to superior RR, time to progression, and overall survival compared with rIFL. The survival benefit for FOLFOX4 observed in the earlier stage of the study was preserved with equal use of either irinotecan or oxaliplatin as second-line therapy.

摘要

目的

此前,我们报告了N9741组间研究的结果,该研究比较了标准推注氟尿嘧啶(FU)、亚叶酸钙联合伊立替康(IFL)与持续输注FU、亚叶酸钙联合奥沙利铂(FOLFOX4)以及伊立替康联合奥沙利铂用于未经治疗的转移性结直肠癌患者的疗效。IFL方案中≥3级毒性发生率较高(导致部分患者死亡),促使我们将伊立替康和FU的起始剂量均降低20%(rIFL)。本文比较了rIFL与FOLFOX4。

患者与方法

主要比较指标为疾病进展时间,次要终点为缓解率(RR)、总生存期和毒性。

结果

305例患者被随机分组。在计划的中期分析中,当结果越过预定的停止界限时,北中部癌症治疗组数据安全监测委员会中断了入组。在疾病进展时间方面,FOLFOX4显著优于rIFL(分别为9.7个月和5.5个月;P<0.0001),RR(分别为48%和32%;P = 0.006),以及总生存期(分别为19.0个月和16.3个月;P = 0.026)。在恶心、呕吐、腹泻、发热性中性粒细胞减少、脱水或60天全因死亡率方面,两种方案的毒性特征无显著差异。感觉神经病变和中性粒细胞减少在FOLFOX4组更为常见。两组中约75%的患者接受了二线治疗;rIFL组58%的患者接受了以奥沙利铂为基础的二线治疗,FOLFOX4组55%的患者接受了以伊立替康为基础的方案作为二线治疗。

结论

与rIFL相比,FOLFOX4的RR、疾病进展时间和总生存期更优。在研究早期观察到的FOLFOX4的生存获益在二线治疗中同等使用伊立替康或奥沙利铂时得以保留。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验