7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin combined with gemcitabine as first-line treatment for metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer. Final results of a phase I/II trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin compared with conventional doxorubicin in a randomized multicenter trial as first-line therapy of metastatic breast carcinoma.

            The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of the liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin, TLC D-99 (Myocet, Elan Pharmaceuticals, Princeton, NJ), and conventional doxorubicin in first-line treatment of metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC). Two hundred twenty-four patients with MBC and no prior therapy for metastatic disease were randomized to receive either TLC D-99 (75 mg/m(2)) or doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks, in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary efficacy endpoint was response rate. Responses were assessed using World Health Organization criteria and were required to be of at least 6 weeks' duration. The primary safety endpoint was cardiotoxicity. Cardiac function was monitored by multiple-gated radionuclide cardioangiography scan, and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was scored at a central laboratory. Patients were removed from study if LVEF declined 20 or more EF units from baseline to a final value of greater than or equal to 50%, or by 10 or more units to a final value of less than 50%, or onset of clinical congestive heart failure (CHF). Median age was 54 years in both treatment groups. All relevant prognostic factors were balanced, with the exception that there were significantly more progesterone receptor positive patients in the doxorubicin-treated group. Protocol-defined cardiotoxicity was observed in 13% of TLC D-99 patients (including 2 cases of CHF) compared to 29% of doxorubicin patients (including 9 cases of CHF). Median cumulative doxorubicin dose at onset of cardiotoxicity was 785 mg/m(2) for TLC D-99 versus 570 mg/m(2) for doxorubicin (P = 0.0001; hazard ratio, 3.56). The overall response rate was 26% in both treatment groups. The median TTP was 2.9 months on TLC D-99 versus 3.1 months on doxorubicin. Median survival was 16 versus 20 months with a nonsignificant trend in favor of doxorubicin (P = 0.09). Clinical toxicities, commonly associated with doxorubicin, appeared less common with TLC D-99, although the difference was not statistically significant. There was only one report of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (Grade 2) with this liposomal formulation of doxorubicin. Single-agent TLC D-99 produces less cardiotoxicity than doxorubicin, while providing comparable antitumor activity. Copyright 2002 American Cancer Society.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reduced cardiotoxicity and preserved antitumor efficacy of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in a randomized, multicenter trial of metastatic breast cancer.

              To determine whether Myocet (liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin; The Liposome Company, Elan Corporation, Princeton, NJ) in combination with cyclophosphamide significantly reduces doxorubicin cardiotoxicity while providing comparable antitumor efficacy in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Two hundred ninety-seven patients with MBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were randomized to receive either 60 mg/m(2) of Myocet (M) or conventional doxorubicin (A), in combination with 600 mg/m(2) of cyclophosphamide (C), every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Cardiotoxicity was defined by reductions in left-ventricular ejection fraction, assessed by serial multigated radionuclide angiography scans, or congestive heart failure (CHF). Antitumor efficacy was assessed by objective tumor response rates (World Health Organization criteria), time to progression, and survival. Six percent of MC patients versus 21% (including five cases of CHF) of AC patients developed cardiotoxicity (P =.0002). Median cumulative doxorubicin dose at onset was more than 2,220 mg/m(2) for MC versus 480 mg/m(2) for AC (P =.0001, hazard ratio, 5.04). MC patients also experienced less grade 4 neutropenia. Antitumor efficacy of MC versus AC was comparable: objective response rates, 43% versus 43%; median time to progression, 5.1% versus 5.5 months; median time to treatment failure, 4.6 versus 4.4 months; and median survival, 19 versus 16 months. Myocet improves the therapeutic index of doxorubicin by significantly reducing cardiotoxicity and grade 4 neutropenia and provides comparable antitumor efficacy, when used in combination with cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for MBC.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
                Breast Cancer Res Treat
                Springer Nature
                0167-6806
                1573-7217
                July 2009
                October 22 2008
                July 2009
                : 116
                : 2
                : 351-358
                Article
                10.1007/s10549-008-0218-8
                8c36d053-291d-4d6d-af33-5c505c25c218
                © 2009
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article