Trastuzumab Beyond Progression for HER2 Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Progression-Free Survival on First-Line Therapy Predicts Overall Survival Impact

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Rayson ◽  
Sarah Lutes ◽  
Gordon Walsh ◽  
Marlene Sellon ◽  
Bruce Colwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Progression ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Phase III Trial of Epirubicin Plus Paclitaxel Compared With Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide As First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Trial AB01

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (33) ◽  
pp. 8322-8330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth E. Langley ◽  
James Carmichael ◽  
Alison L. Jones ◽  
David A. Cameron ◽  
Wendi Qian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Purpose To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of epirubicin and paclitaxel (EP) with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy (except for adjuvant therapy) were randomly assigned to receive either EP (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2) or EC (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary outcome was progression-free survival; secondary outcome measures were overall survival, response rates, and toxicity. Results Between 1996 and 1999, 705 patients (353 EP patients and 352 EC patients) underwent random assignment. Patient characteristics were well matched between the two groups, and 71% of patients received six cycles of treatment. Objective response rates were 65% for the EP group and 55% for the EC group (P = .015). At the time of analysis, 641 patients (91%) had died. Median progression-free survival time was 7.0 months for the EP group and 7.1 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.24; P = .41), and median overall survival time was 13 months for the EP group and 14 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.19; P = .8). EP patients, compared with EC patients, had more grade 3 and 4 mucositis (6% v 2%, respectively; P = .0006) and grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity (5% v 1%, respectively; P < .0001). Conclusion In terms of progression-free survival and overall survival, there was no evidence of a difference between EP and EC. The data demonstrate no additional advantage to using EP instead of EC as first-line chemotherapy for MBC in taxane-naïve patients.

Prognostic impact of prior local therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikifumi Koura ◽  
Masaki Shiota ◽  
Shohei Ueda ◽  
Takashi Matsumoto ◽  
Satoshi Kobayashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Local Therapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Objective This study aimed to reveal the prognostic values of prior local therapy in first-line therapy using androgen receptor-axis targeting agents (abiraterone or enzalutamide) or docetaxel for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Methods The study included 303 patients treated with first-line therapy for non-metastatic and metastatic CRPC. The association between prior local therapy and therapeutic outcome including progression-free survival and overall survival was investigated by univariate and multivariate analyses as well as propensity score-matched analysis. Results In univariate analysis, local prior therapy was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.56, 95% confidence interval, 0.40–0.79; P = 0.0009). Overall survival, but not progression-free survival, was better among patients with prior local therapy compared with patients without prior local therapy even after multivariate analysis and propensity score-matched analysis. Conclusions This study robustly indicated that prior local treatment was prognostic for overall survival among patients with CRPC. This finding is useful to predict patient prognosis in CRPC.

Doxorubicin and Paclitaxel Versus Fluorouracil, Doxorubicin, and Cyclophosphamide as First-Line Therapy for Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer: Final Results of a Randomized Phase III Multicenter Trial

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1707-1715 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Jassem ◽  
Tadeusz Pieńkowski ◽  
Anna Płuzańska ◽  
Svetislav Jelic ◽  
Vera Gorbunova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE: This phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) to 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 267 women with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive either AT (doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 followed 24 hours later by paclitaxel 220 mg/m2) or FAC (5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2), each administered every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. Patients had to have measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2. Only one prior non–anthracycline, nontaxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy regimen was allowed. RESULTS: Overall response rates for patients randomized to AT and FAC were 68% and 55%, respectively (P = .032). Median time to progression and overall survival were significantly longer for AT compared with FAC (time to progression 8.3 months v 6.2 months [P = .034]; overall survival 23.3 months v 18.3 months [P = .013]). Therapy was generally well-tolerated (median of eight cycles delivered in each arm). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more common with AT than with FAC (89% v 65%; P < .001); however, the incidence of fever and infection was low. Grade 3 or 4 arthralgia and myalgia, peripheral neuropathy, and diarrhea were more common with AT, whereas nausea and vomiting were more common with FAC. The incidence of cardiotoxicity was low in both arms. CONCLUSION: AT conferred a significant advantage in response rate, time to progression, and overall survival compared with FAC. Treatment was well-tolerated with no unexpected toxicities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document