Ingle J N, Mailliard J A, Schaid D J, Krook J E, Gerstner J B, Pfeifle D M, Marschke R F, Long H J, McCormack G W, Foley J F
Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905.
Am J Clin Oncol. 1989 Dec;12(6):474-80. doi: 10.1097/00000421-198912000-00003.
A randomized clinical trial was performed to determine if combination therapy with doxorubicin, vincristine, and mitomycin C (DVM) was superior to doxorubicin alone in women with metastatic breast cancer for whom prior chemotherapy had failed. A total of 185 women were randomized to monthly courses of D (60 mg/m2, observation after 500 mg/m2); or D (50 mg/m2, maximum cumulative dose 500 mg/m2), V (1 mg/m2), and M (10 mg/m2, given every other cycle). Patients failing after D alone could receive V (1 mg weekly for 5 weeks, then 1.2 mg/m2 every 5 weeks) plus M (12 mg/m2 every 5 weeks). Objective responses were seen in 24 of 95 patients (25%) on D alone and 39 of 90 patients (43%) on DVM (two-sided p = 0.01). The time to disease progression distribution was significantly better for DVM (two-sided p = 0.02), but the magnitude of the advantage was small with the medians being 2.7 months for D and 4.2 months for DVM. There was no significant difference in survival between the two regimens. The degree of leukopenia was greater for DVM both in terms of median white blood cell nadir (1,300/microL versus 1,700/microL) and percentage of patients with a nadir less than 1,000/microL (33% versus 16%). A total of 45 patients received VM following D alone, and only seven (16%) achieved an objective response. We conclude that, despite a significantly higher response rate and longer time to progression, the degree of clinical benefit is not sufficient to recommend the combination of DVM over D alone as second-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. The level of efficacy seen with VM as tertiary therapy is low and is of such a magnitude to suggest that V adds little but toxicity to M.
进行了一项随机临床试验,以确定对于既往化疗失败的转移性乳腺癌女性患者,多柔比星、长春新碱和丝裂霉素C联合治疗(DVM)是否优于单独使用多柔比星。总共185名女性被随机分为接受每月疗程的D(60mg/m²,500mg/m²后观察);或D(50mg/m²,最大累积剂量500mg/m²)、V(1mg/m²)和M(10mg/m²,每隔一个周期给药)。仅接受D治疗后失败的患者可接受V(第1周1mg,共5周,然后每5周1.2mg/m²)加M(每5周12mg/m²)。仅接受D治疗的95名患者中有24名(25%)出现客观缓解,接受DVM治疗的90名患者中有39名(43%)出现客观缓解(双侧p = 0.01)。DVM组疾病进展时间分布明显更好(双侧p = 0.02),但优势幅度较小,D组中位数为2.7个月,DVM组为4.2个月。两种治疗方案的生存率无显著差异。DVM组白细胞减少程度更大,无论是白细胞计数最低点中位数(1300/μL对1700/μL)还是最低点低于1000/μL的患者百分比(33%对16%)。总共45名患者在仅接受D治疗后接受VM治疗,只有7名(16%)获得客观缓解。我们得出结论,尽管DVM的缓解率显著更高且疾病进展时间更长,但临床获益程度不足以推荐DVM联合方案优于单独使用D作为转移性乳腺癌女性患者的二线治疗。VM作为三线治疗的疗效水平较低,提示V对M几乎没有增加疗效但增加了毒性。