Fetting J H, Gray R, Fairclough D L, Smith T J, Margolin K A, Citron M L, Grove-Conrad M, Cella D, Pandya K, Robert N, Henderson I C, Osborne C K, Abeloff M D
Johns Hopkins Oncology Center, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
J Clin Oncol. 1998 Jul;16(7):2382-91. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.7.2382.
The Intergroup conducted this breast cancer adjuvant trial to compare an investigational 16-week regimen with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (5-FU; CAF). The 16-week regimen features greater doxorubicin and 5-FU dose-intensity than CAF and improved scheduling of antimetabolites with sequential methotrexate and 5-FU, as well as infusion 5-FU.
A total of 646 node-positive, receptor-negative patients were randomly assigned to receive either the 1 6-week regimen or six cycles of CAF. Breast cancer outcomes included recurrence as well as disease-free and overall survival. Toxicity was evaluated by the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC). Treatment-related quality of life was assessed by the Breast Chemotherapy Questionnaire (BCQ) before, during, and 4 months after treatment in 163 patients. The trial was designed to use one-sided tests of significance for power calculations, but is now reported with both one-sided and the traditional two-sided tests of significance.
At a median follow-up of 3.9 years, the estimated 4-year recurrence-free survival rate was 67.5% with the 16-week regimen versus 62.7% with CAF (P = .19, two-sided; P = .095, one-sided). The estimated 4-year survival rate was 78.1% with the 16-week regimen versus 71.4% with CAF (P = .10, two-sided; P = .05, one-sided). CAF produced significantly higher grades of leukopenia, granulocytopenia, and thrombocytopenia, as well as liver and cardiac toxicity, whereas the 16-week regimen produced significantly higher grades of anemia, nausea, stomatitis, and weight loss, as well as skin and neurotoxicity. There were three treatment-related deaths with CAF but none with the 16-week regimen. During treatment, quality of life declined significantly more with the 16-week regimen than CAF, but by 4 months posttreatment, there was no difference.
The 16-week regimen produced marginally better breast cancer outcomes than CAF with similar toxicity but a greater reduction in during-treatment quality of life. The 16-week regimen should not be used instead of a standard-dose regimen without careful consideration of the 16-week regimen's pros and cons, which include its complicated schedule. It should probably not be tested further, but its antimetabolite schedules and frequent drug administration (ie, dose density) should be considered in the development of new regimens.
该协作组开展了这项乳腺癌辅助治疗试验,以比较一种为期16周的试验性方案与环磷酰胺、多柔比星和氟尿嘧啶(5-FU;CAF)方案。16周方案的多柔比星和5-FU剂量强度高于CAF,且通过序贯甲氨蝶呤和5-FU以及5-FU静脉输注改善了抗代谢药物的给药计划。
总共646例淋巴结阳性、受体阴性的患者被随机分配接受16周方案或6个周期的CAF方案。乳腺癌结局包括复发以及无病生存期和总生存期。毒性通过通用毒性标准(CTC)进行评估。在163例患者治疗前、治疗期间及治疗后4个月,采用乳腺癌化疗问卷(BCQ)评估与治疗相关的生活质量。该试验设计用于功效计算的单侧显著性检验,但现在同时报告了单侧和传统的双侧显著性检验。
在中位随访3.9年时,16周方案的4年无复发生存率估计为67.5%,而CAF方案为62.7%(双侧P = 0.19;单侧P = 0.095)。16周方案的4年生存率估计为78.1%,而CAF方案为71.4%(双侧P = 0.10;单侧P = 0.05)。CAF导致的白细胞减少、粒细胞减少和血小板减少以及肝脏和心脏毒性的分级显著更高,而16周方案导致的贫血、恶心、口腔炎和体重减轻以及皮肤和神经毒性的分级显著更高。CAF有3例与治疗相关的死亡,而16周方案无相关死亡。在治疗期间,16周方案导致的生活质量下降幅度显著大于CAF,但在治疗后4个月,两者无差异。
16周方案在乳腺癌结局方面略优于CAF方案,毒性相似,但治疗期间生活质量下降幅度更大。在未仔细考虑16周方案的利弊(包括其复杂的给药计划)之前,不应使用16周方案替代标准剂量方案。可能不应进一步对其进行试验,但在新方案的研发中应考虑其抗代谢药物给药计划和频繁给药(即剂量密度)。