Suppr超能文献

序贯或同步使用蒽环类药物和多西他赛的辅助化疗:国际乳腺癌研究组02-98随机试验

Adjuvant chemotherapy with sequential or concurrent anthracycline and docetaxel: Breast International Group 02-98 randomized trial.

作者信息

Francis Prudence, Crown John, Di Leo Angelo, Buyse Marc, Balil Ana, Andersson Michael, Nordenskjöld Bo, Lang Istvan, Jakesz Raimund, Vorobiof Daniel, Gutiérrez Jorge, van Hazel Guy, Dolci Stella, Jamin Sophie, Bendahmane Belguendouz, Gelber Richard D, Goldhirsch Aron, Castiglione-Gertsch Monica, Piccart-Gebhart Martine

机构信息

Division of Haematology and Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne 8006, Australia.

出版信息

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Jan 16;100(2):121-33. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm287. Epub 2008 Jan 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Docetaxel is more effective than doxorubicin for patients with advanced breast cancer. The Breast International Group 02-98 randomized trial tested the effect of incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy and compared sequential vs concurrent administration of doxorubicin and docetaxel.

METHODS

Patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer (n = 2887) were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 1) sequential control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil [CMF]); 2) concurrent control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide at 600 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 3) sequential docetaxel (three cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of docetaxel at 100 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 4) concurrent docetaxel (four cycles of doxorubicin at 50 mg/m2 plus docetaxel at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF). The primary comparison evaluated the efficacy of including docetaxel regardless of schedule and was planned after 1215 disease-free survival (DFS) events (ie, relapse, second primary cancer, or death from any cause). Docetaxel and control treatment groups were compared by log-rank tests, and hazard ratios (HR) of DFS events were calculated by Cox modeling. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Due to a lower-than-anticipated rate of relapse, this analysis was performed after 5 years with 732 events. Patients in control arms had a 5-year DFS of 73% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70% to 75%). Docetaxel treatment resulted in an improvement in DFS of borderline statistical significance compared with control treatment (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.00; P = .05). However, DFS in the sequential docetaxel arm was better than that in the concurrent docetaxel arm (HR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.00) and in the sequential control arm (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based therapy resulted in an improvement in DFS that was of borderline statistical significance. However, important differences may be related to doxorubicin and docetaxel scheduling, with sequential but not concurrent administration, appearing to produce better DFS than anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

摘要

背景

对于晚期乳腺癌患者,多西他赛比阿霉素更有效。国际乳腺癌研究组02-98随机试验测试了将多西他赛纳入基于蒽环类药物的辅助化疗的效果,并比较了阿霉素和多西他赛的序贯给药与同步给药。

方法

淋巴结阳性乳腺癌患者(n = 2887)被随机分配到四种治疗方案之一:1)序贯对照组(四个周期的阿霉素,剂量为75 mg/m²,随后是三个周期的环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤和5-氟尿嘧啶[CMF]);2)同步对照组(四个周期的阿霉素,剂量为60 mg/m²加环磷酰胺,剂量为600 mg/m²,随后是三个周期的CMF);3)序贯多西他赛组(三个周期的阿霉素,剂量为75 mg/m²,随后是三个周期的多西他赛,剂量为100 mg/m²,随后是三个周期的CMF);4)同步多西他赛组(四个周期的阿霉素,剂量为50 mg/m²加多西他赛,剂量为75 mg/m²,随后是三个周期的CMF)。主要比较评估了无论给药方案如何,加入多西他赛的疗效,并计划在1215例无病生存(DFS)事件(即复发、第二原发性癌症或任何原因导致的死亡)后进行。通过对数秩检验比较多西他赛和对照组,通过Cox模型计算DFS事件的风险比(HR)。所有统计检验均为双侧检验。

结果

由于复发率低于预期,该分析在5年后进行,共有732例事件。对照组患者的5年DFS率为73%(95%置信区间[CI] = 70%至75%)。与对照治疗相比,多西他赛治疗使DFS有了边缘统计学意义的改善(HR = 0.86,95% CI = 0.74至1.00;P = 0.05)。然而,序贯多西他赛组的DFS优于同步多西他赛组(HR = 0.83,95% CI = 0.69至1.00)和序贯对照组(HR = 0.79,95% CI = 0.64至0.98)。

结论

将多西他赛纳入基于蒽环类药物的治疗使DFS有了边缘统计学意义的改善。然而,重要的差异可能与阿霉素和多西他赛的给药方案有关,序贯给药而非同步给药似乎比基于蒽环类药物的化疗产生更好的DFS。

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