Japanese
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials 1989-Dec

Randomized trial of doxorubicin alone or combined with vincristine and mitomycin C in women with metastatic breast cancer.

登録ユーザーのみが記事を翻訳できます
ログインサインアップ
リンクがクリップボードに保存されます
J N Ingle
J A Mailliard
D J Schaid
J E Krook
J B Gerstner
D M Pfeifle
R F Marschke
H J Long
G W McCormack
J F Foley

キーワード

概要

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.

Facebookページに参加する

科学に裏打ちされた最も完全な薬草データベース

  • 55の言語で動作します
  • 科学に裏打ちされたハーブ療法
  • 画像によるハーブの認識
  • インタラクティブGPSマップ-場所にハーブをタグ付け(近日公開)
  • 検索に関連する科学出版物を読む
  • それらの効果によって薬草を検索する
  • あなたの興味を整理し、ニュース研究、臨床試験、特許について最新情報を入手してください

症状や病気を入力し、役立つ可能性のあるハーブについて読み、ハーブを入力して、それが使用されている病気や症状を確認します。
*すべての情報は公開された科学的研究に基づいています

Google Play badgeApp Store badge