Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 23, No 7 (March 1), 2005: pp. 1401-1408
© 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology.
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.12.106

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zielinski, C.
Right arrow Articles by Brodowicz, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zielinski, C.
Right arrow Articles by Brodowicz, T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Gemcitabine, Epirubicin, and Paclitaxel Versus Fluorouracil, Epirubicin, and Cyclophosphamide As First-Line Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Central European Cooperative Oncology Group International, Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Phase III Trial

Christoph Zielinski, Semir Beslija, Zrinka Mrsic-Krmpotic, Marzena Welnicka-Jaskiewicz, Christoph Wiltschke, Zsuzsanna Kahan, Mislav Grgic, Valentina Tzekova, Moshe Inbar, Jozika Cervek, Ivan Chernozemsky, Janos Szanto, Stanislav Spanik, Maria Wagnerova, Nicolae Ghilezan, Janusz Pawlega, Damir Vrbanec, Dmitry Khamtsov, Victoria Soldatenkova, Thomas Brodowicz

From the University Hospital Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute of Oncology, Sarajevo, Bosnia; University Hospital, Zagreb, Croatia; Medical University, Gdansk; Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland; Onkotherápiás Klinika, Szeged; Debrecen Medical University, Debrecen, Hungary; University Hospital "Queen Joanna"; National Oncological Center, Sofia, Bulgaria; Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel; Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Nemocnica Saetes Alzbety, Bratislava; Fakultna Nemocnica Luisa Pasteura, Kosice, Slovakia; Institute of Oncology, Cluj, Romania; and InnoPharm, Smolensk, Russia

Address reprint requests to Christoph C. Zielinski, MD, Department of Medicine I, University Hospital, 18-20 Waehringer Guertel, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; e-mail: christoph.zielinski{at}meduniwien.ac.at

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this phase III trial were to compare the time to progressive disease (TtPD), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, and toxicity of gemcitabine, epirubicin, and paclitaxel (GET) versus fluorouracil (FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Female patients aged 18 to 75 years with stage IV and measurable MBC were enrolled and randomly assigned to either gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2, days 1 and 4), epirubicin (90 mg/m2, day 1), and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, day 1) or FU (500 mg/m2, day 1), epirubicin (90 mg/m2, day 1), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2, day 1). Both regimens were administered every 21 days for a maximum of eight cycles.

RESULTS: Between October 1999 and November 2002, 259 patients (GET, n = 124; FEC, n = 135) were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced across treatment arms. After a median of 20.4 months of follow-up, median TtPD was 9.1 months and 9.0 months in the GET and FEC arms, respectively (P = .557). The ORR was 62.3% in the GET arm (n = 114) and 51.2% in the FEC arm (n = 129; P = .093). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities, including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, stomatitis, neurosensory toxicity, and allergy, occurred significantly more often in the GET arm.

CONCLUSION: No significant differences in terms of TtPD and ORR were observed between the two treatment arms. Treatment-related toxicity was higher in the GET arm.

Supported by grants from Eli Lilly and Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pharmacia Upjohn.

Presented in part at the 39th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Chicago, IL, May 31-June 3, 2003.

Statistical analysis was performed by D.K. and V.S. from InnoPharm, Smolensk, Russia.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found at the end of this article.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
D. Mauri, N. P. Polyzos, G. Salanti, N. Pavlidis, and J. P. A. Ioannidis
Multiple-Treatments Meta-analysis of Chemotherapy and Targeted Therapies in Advanced Breast Cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst, December 17, 2008; 100(24): 1780 - 1791.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
S Beslija, J Bonneterre, H Burstein, V Cocquyt, M Gnant, P Goodwin, V Heinemann, J Jassem, W. Kostler, M Krainer, et al.
Second consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer
Ann. Onc., February 1, 2007; 18(2): 215 - 225.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online