Suppr超能文献

随机 III 期试验:辅助表柔比星继以环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤和 5-氟尿嘧啶(CMF)与 CMF 继以表柔比星治疗淋巴结阴性或 1-3 个淋巴结阳性快速增殖型乳腺癌患者。

Randomized phase III trial of adjuvant epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) versus CMF followed by epirubicin in patients with node-negative or 1-3 node-positive rapidly proliferating breast cancer.

机构信息

Cancer Institute of Romagna (I.R.S.T.), Meldola, Italy.

出版信息

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Feb;125(3):775-84. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-1257-5. Epub 2010 Dec 4.

Abstract

Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) have proven highly effective in rapidly proliferating breast cancer (RPBC). It has also been seen that sequential administration of doxorubicin and CMF is superior to their alternation, especially in indolent tumors. In a phase III study, we evaluated whether adjuvant epirubicin (E) followed by CMF is superior to the inverse sequence in RPBC. Patients with node-negative or 1-3 node-positive RPBC (Thymidine Labeling Index > 3% or histological grade 3 or S-phase > 10% or Ki67 > 20%) were randomized to receive E (100 mg/m(2) i.v. d1, q21 days for 4 cycles) followed by CMF (600, 40, 600 mg/m(2) i.v. d1 and 8, q28 days for 4 cycles) (E → CMF) or CMF followed by E (CMF → E) or CMF for 6 cycles. From November 1997 to December 2004, 1066 patients were enrolled: E → CMF 440, CMF → E 438, and CMF 188. At a median follow-up of 69 months, 5-year OS was 91% (95% CI 88-94) for E → CMF and 93% (95% CI 90-95) for CMF → E, with adjusted hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% CI 0.58-1.35), and DFS was 80% in both arms, with adjusted hazard ratio of 0.99 (95% CI 0.73-1.33, Cox model). Adverse events were similar, apart from a higher rate of neutropenia in the CMF → E arm. No important differences in clinical outcome were observed between the two different sequences, making both a valid option in early breast cancer. Further molecular characterization of the tumors might help to identify subgroups achieving higher benefit from either sequence.

摘要

辅助环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤和 5-氟尿嘧啶(CMF)已被证明对快速增殖性乳腺癌(RPBC)非常有效。连续给予阿霉素和 CMF 优于交替使用,尤其是在惰性肿瘤中。在一项 III 期研究中,我们评估了辅助表柔比星(E)继以 CMF 是否优于 RPBC 的逆序治疗。淋巴结阴性或 1-3 个淋巴结阳性 RPBC(胸苷标记指数>3%或组织学分级 3 或 S 期>10%或 Ki67>20%)的患者被随机分为接受 E(100 mg/m2静脉注射 d1,每 21 天 4 个周期)继以 CMF(600、40、600 mg/m2静脉注射 d1 和 8,每 28 天 4 个周期)(E→CMF)或 CMF 继以 E(CMF→E)或 CMF 治疗 6 个周期。1997 年 11 月至 2004 年 12 月,共纳入 1066 例患者:E→CMF 440 例,CMF→E 438 例,CMF 188 例。中位随访 69 个月,E→CMF 组 5 年 OS 为 91%(95%CI 88-94),CMF→E 组为 93%(95%CI 90-95),调整后的危险比为 0.88(95%CI 0.58-1.35),DFS 均为 80%,调整后的危险比为 0.99(95%CI 0.73-1.33,Cox 模型)。除了 CMF→E 组中性粒细胞减少发生率较高外,两组的不良事件相似。两种不同方案的临床结局无明显差异,均为早期乳腺癌的有效选择。进一步对肿瘤的分子特征进行分析,可能有助于确定从任一方案中获益更高的亚组。

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