Loprinzi C L, Tormey D C, Rasmussen P, Falkson G, Davis T E, Falkson H C, Chang A Y
J Clin Oncol. 1986 Jan;4(1):46-56. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1986.4.1.46.
Ninety-seven eligible and evaluable women with metastatic breast cancer were placed on a prospective clinical protocol to evaluate the use of continuous cyclic therapy with dibromodulcitol, doxorubicin, vincristine, tamoxifen, and fluoxymesterone (DAVTH) v DAVTH alternating with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP); and the use of pretreatment and serial carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels in these patients. Continuous DAVTH and DAVTH/CMFP were equivalent therapies with respect to response rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), and survival. Pretreatment CEA levels were elevated (greater than 5 ng/mL) in 42/97 patients and less than 5 ng/mL in the remaining patients. Patients with elevated pretreatment CEA levels were more likely to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive (P = .006), to have prolonged disease-free intervals (P = .017), to have hepatic (P = .004) and/or osseous (P = .01) metastases, and to have multiple sites of metastatic disease (P = .004). Pretreatment CEA levels did not significantly predict for overall response rates, TTF, or survival; nonetheless, those patients with low pretreatment CEA levels had more complete responses (CRs) (16/55 v 4/42; P = .02). Serial CEA levels during therapy revealed a number of interesting patterns. During the first 4 months of treatment, serial CEA levels in responding patients either (1) progressively declined (15/29 women with elevated pretreatment CEA levels), or (2) initially rose significantly (mean, 243% of pretreatment value) and then declined (14/29 women with elevated pretreatment CEA levels). Peak CEA levels in the latter patients were seen 27 to 135 days following initiation of cytotoxic therapy. In some patients the initial increase in the CEA level was incorrectly interpreted as evidence of impending disease progression. CEA levels frequently increased around the time of clinical disease progression. However, rising CEA levels rarely provided a clinically meaningful lead time before the appearance of other clinical evidence of disease progression. These data suggest that routine pretreatment and monthly serial CEA levels in metastatic breast cancer patients have minimal use in clinical practice. Two further noteworthy findings were observed in this prospective study. First, patients with an unknown ER status had a prolonged median survival when compared with patients with ER positive or negative tumors; this appeared to be related to prolonged disease-free intervals in ER unknown patients. Second, two case of secondary acute leukemia were seen in patients treated with continuous DAVTH therapy.
97名符合条件且可评估的转移性乳腺癌女性患者被纳入一项前瞻性临床方案,以评估持续循环使用二溴卫矛醇、阿霉素、长春新碱、他莫昔芬和氟羟甲睾酮(DAVTH)与DAVTH交替使用环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤、5-氟尿嘧啶和泼尼松(CMFP)的疗效;以及这些患者治疗前和系列癌胚抗原(CEA)水平的情况。就缓解率、治疗失败时间(TTF)和生存率而言,持续使用DAVTH和DAVTH/CMFP是等效的治疗方法。42/97例患者治疗前CEA水平升高(大于5 ng/mL),其余患者小于5 ng/mL。治疗前CEA水平升高的患者更可能雌激素受体(ER)阳性(P = 0.006),无病间期延长(P = 0.017),有肝转移(P = 0.004)和/或骨转移(P = 0.01),以及有多个转移病灶部位(P = 0.004)。治疗前CEA水平并不能显著预测总体缓解率、TTF或生存率;尽管如此,治疗前CEA水平低的患者有更多的完全缓解(CR)(16/55对4/42;P = 0.02)。治疗期间系列CEA水平显示出一些有趣的模式。在治疗的前4个月,缓解患者的系列CEA水平要么(1)逐渐下降(15/29例治疗前CEA水平升高的女性),要么(2)最初显著升高(平均为治疗前值的243%)然后下降(14/29例治疗前CEA水平升高的女性)。后一组患者的CEA峰值水平在细胞毒性治疗开始后27至135天出现。在一些患者中,CEA水平的最初升高被错误地解释为疾病进展即将发生的证据。CEA水平常在临床疾病进展时升高。然而,CEA水平升高很少在出现其他疾病进展的临床证据之前提供有临床意义的提前期。这些数据表明,转移性乳腺癌患者常规治疗前和每月系列CEA水平在临床实践中作用极小。在这项前瞻性研究中还观察到另外两个值得注意的发现。首先,与ER阳性或阴性肿瘤患者相比,ER状态未知的患者中位生存期延长;这似乎与ER未知患者无病间期延长有关。其次,在接受持续DAVTH治疗的患者中出现了2例继发性急性白血病。