Crump M, Sawka C A, DeBoer G, Buchanan R B, Ingle J N, Forbes J, Meakin J W, Shelley W, Pritchard K I
Division of Haematology/Oncology, Toronto Hospital, Ontario, Canada.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997 Jul;44(3):201-10. doi: 10.1023/a:1005833811584.
We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing tamoxifen to ovarian ablation carried out either by surgery or irradiation as first-line hormonal therapy for pre-menopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Patients in all trials included were required to have measurable disease and to be currently menstruating or within 1 year of cessation of menses, and to have estrogen receptor (ER) positive or unknown disease (ER negative women were admitted to one of the studies). Individual patient data were obtained from the four studies identified and the results updated to June 1992. A total of 220 eligible patients were enrolled in the four trials. There was no difference in overall response rate between tamoxifen and oophorectomy across the four trials (p = 0.94, Mantel-Haenszel test). The odds reduction for progression was 14% +/- 12% and for mortality 6% +/- 13% in favour of tamoxifen, results which were not statistically significant (p = 0.32 and 0.72, respectively). Although the design of all four studies included a cross-over to the other therapy, only 54/111 patients receiving ovarian ablation and 34/109 patients receiving tamoxifen as primary therapy actually crossed over to the other arm at the time of disease progression. Response to initial treatment with tamoxifen was predictive of subsequent response to ovarian ablation (p < 0.05), and response to initial therapy with ovarian ablation was predictive of subsequent response to tamoxifen (p < 0.05). Support curves based on log-likelihood ratios revealed that this meta-analysis provides moderate evidence rejecting a 14% advantage for ovarian ablation compared to tamoxifen in terms of odds of disease progression. A 25% advantage for ovarian ablation with respect to odds of death is also rejected with moderate evidence. We conclude that the efficacy of tamoxifen appears to be similar to that of ovarian ablation by surgery or irradiation as first-line therapy for premenopausal, ER positive metastatic breast cancer, and is unlikely to be substantially inferior.
我们对随机试验进行了一项荟萃分析,比较他莫昔芬与通过手术或放疗进行卵巢去势,作为绝经前转移性乳腺癌女性一线激素治疗的效果。所有纳入试验的患者均要求患有可测量的疾病,目前正在月经或绝经后1年内,且患有雌激素受体(ER)阳性或未知疾病(ER阴性女性纳入其中一项研究)。从确定的四项研究中获取了个体患者数据,并将结果更新至1992年6月。四项试验共纳入220例符合条件的患者。在四项试验中,他莫昔芬与卵巢切除术的总体缓解率无差异(p = 0.94,Mantel-Haenszel检验)。他莫昔芬在疾病进展方面的优势比降低为14%±12%,在死亡率方面为6%±13%,结果无统计学意义(分别为p = 0.32和0.72)。尽管所有四项研究的设计都包括交叉至另一种治疗,但在疾病进展时,只有54/111接受卵巢去势的患者和34/109接受他莫昔芬作为初始治疗的患者实际交叉至另一组。对他莫昔芬初始治疗的反应可预测随后对卵巢去势的反应(p < 0.05),对卵巢去势初始治疗的反应可预测随后对他莫昔芬的反应(p < 0.05)。基于对数似然比的支持曲线显示,该荟萃分析提供了中等证据,拒绝了卵巢去势相对于他莫昔芬在疾病进展优势比方面有14%优势的说法。卵巢去势在死亡优势比方面有25%优势的说法也被中等证据拒绝。我们得出结论,对于绝经前、ER阳性转移性乳腺癌的一线治疗,他莫昔芬的疗效似乎与手术或放疗进行卵巢去势相似,且不太可能明显较差。