Dataset Information

Weekly Paclitaxel plus Capecitabine versus Docetaxel Every 3 Weeks plus Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

ABSTRACT: Background. We performed a randomized phase II study comparing efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel 80?mg/m(2) (Weetax) with three weekly docetaxel 75?mg/m(2) (Threetax), both in combination with oral capecitabine 1000?mg/m(2) twice daily for 2 weeks followed by a 1-week break. Patients. Thirty-seven women with confirmed metastatic breast cancer were randomized. Results. Median TTF was 174 (Weetax) versus 147 days (Threetax) (P=0.472). Median OS was 933 (Weetax) versus 464 days (Threetax) (P=0.191). Reasons for TTF were PD 8/18 (Weetax), 9/19 (Threetax); and toxicity: 8/18 (Weetax), 8/19 (Threetax). ORR was 72% (Weetax) versus 26% (Threetax) (P = 0.01). The Threetax-combination resulted in a higher incidence of leuco-/neutropenia compared to Weetax. Grade II anemia was more pronounced in the Weetax group. No difference was found in quality of life. Conclusion. Taxanes in combination with capecitabine resulted in a high level of toxicity. Taxanes and capecitabine should be considered given sequentially and not in combination.

SUBMITTER: Wist EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3265117 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Weekly Paclitaxel plus Capecitabine versus Docetaxel Every 3 Weeks plus Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Wist E A EA Mjaaland I I Løkkevik E E Sommer H H HH

Journal of oncology 20120115

Background. We performed a randomized phase II study comparing efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) (Weetax) with three weekly docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) (Threetax), both in combination with oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily for 2 weeks followed by a 1-week break. Patients. Thirty-seven women with confirmed metastatic breast cancer were randomized. Results. Median TTF was 174 (Weetax) versus 147 days (Threetax) (P=0.472). Median OS was 933 (Weetax) versus 464 days (Threetax) ...[more]

PMID: 22291703

Similar Datasets

Project description:The anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab improves the outcome in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. However, most cases of advanced disease eventually progress. Pertuzumab, an anti-HER2 humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits receptor dimerization, has a mechanism of action that is complementary to that of trastuzumab, and combination therapy with the two antibodies has shown promising activity and an acceptable safety profile in phase 2 studies involving patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.We randomly assigned 808 patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer to receive placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel (control group) or pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel (pertuzumab group) as first-line treatment until the time of disease progression or the development of toxic effects that could not be effectively managed. The primary end point was independently assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, progression-free survival as assessed by the investigator, the objective response rate, and safety.The median progression-free survival was 12.4 months in the control group, as compared with 18.5 months in the pertuzumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). The interim analysis of overall survival showed a strong trend in favor of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel. The safety profile was generally similar in the two groups, with no increase in left ventricular systolic dysfunction; the rates of febrile neutropenia and diarrhea of grade 3 or above were higher in the pertuzumab group than in the control group.The combination of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel, as compared with placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel, when used as first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, significantly prolonged progression-free survival, with no increase in cardiac toxic effects. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00567190.).

Project description:PURPOSE:NALA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01808573) is a randomized, active-controlled, phase III trial comparing neratinib, an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), plus capecitabine (N+C) against lapatinib, a reversible dual TKI, plus capecitabine (L+C) in patients with centrally confirmed HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with ? 2 previous HER2-directed MBC regimens. METHODS:Patients, including those with stable, asymptomatic CNS disease, were randomly assigned 1:1 to neratinib (240 mg once every day) plus capecitabine (750 mg/m2 twice a day 14 d/21 d) with loperamide prophylaxis, or to lapatinib (1,250 mg once every day) plus capecitabine (1,000 mg/m2 twice a day 14 d/21 d). Coprimary end points were centrally confirmed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). NALA was considered positive if either primary end point was met (? split between end points). Secondary end points were time to CNS disease intervention, investigator-assessed PFS, objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), clinical benefit rate, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS:A total of 621 patients from 28 countries were randomly assigned (N+C, n = 307; L+C, n = 314). Centrally reviewed PFS was improved with N+C (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.93; stratified log-rank P = .0059). The OS HR was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.07; P = .2098). Fewer interventions for CNS disease occurred with N+C versus L+C (cumulative incidence, 22.8% v 29.2%; P = .043). ORRs were N+C 32.8% (95% CI, 27.1 to 38.9) and L+C 26.7% (95% CI, 21.5 to 32.4; P = .1201); median DoR was 8.5 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74; P = .0004). The most common all-grade adverse events were diarrhea (N+C 83% v L+C 66%) and nausea (53% v 42%). Discontinuation rates and HRQoL were similar between groups. CONCLUSION:N+C significantly improved PFS and time to intervention for CNS disease versus L+C. No new N+C safety signals were observed.

Project description:Capecitabine and paclitaxel are established effective treatments, alone and combined with other cytotoxic and targeted agents, for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Paclitaxel polyglumex (a macromolecular conjugate of paclitaxel bound to poly-L-glutamic acid) has potential advantages over conventional paclitaxel, including little alopecia, short infusion time with no premedication, enhanced tumor permeability/retention effect, and improved tolerability. We therefore examined tolerability and efficacy of paclitaxel polyglumex with capecitabine in patients with MBC.This was a single-stage phase 2 study, with interim analysis conducted with endpoints of tumor response, adverse events (toxicities), time to progression, and overall survival. The main eligibility criteria were: age >18 years, no prior MBC chemotherapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score <2, disease measurable by RECIST criteria, no HER2 overexpression or amplification, no brain metastases or peripheral sensory neuropathy. Treatment consisted of paclitaxel polyglumex (135 mg/m) by intravenous infusion on day 1+capecitabine (825 mg/m) orally twice daily on days 1 to 14, repeated on a 3-week cycle. Forty-one evaluable patients were required to test the null hypothesis that the complete and partial tumor response rate (CR+PR) was at the most 40% against the alternative of at least 60%. Paclitaxel polyglumex+capecitabine would be considered promising in this population if ?21 responses were observed among first 41 evaluable patients.Forty-eight patients were enrolled between April 2006 and April 2007; all patients were evaluable. The median number of treatment cycles administered was 6. Eighteen patients [38%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 24%-53%] had a confirmed tumor response (2 CR, 16 PR) by RECIST criteria. Fifteen (38%; 95% CI, 23%-53%) responses occurred in first 41 patients, falling short of prespecified goal of 21 responses. Median duration of tumor response was 13.2 months. Three of the responders were progression free at last follow-up with a median follow-up of 43 months. Median progression-free survival was 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.0-7.6 mo). Six-month progression-free survival was 42% (95% CI, 30%-58%). Median dose level administered was paclitaxel polyglumex (135 mg/m) and capecitabine (825 mg/m) for cycles 1 to 7. Most common severe (grade 3/4) toxicities (at least possibly related to study drug) were: leukopenia 9 (19%), neutropenia 8 (17%), neurosensory 4 (8%), skin reaction-hand/foot 4 (8%), and dyspnea 2 (4%). Forty-six percent (22/47) of patients experienced grade ?3 toxicity and 8% (4/48) experienced grade ?4 toxicity. No alopecia was reported.Although the trial failed to reach goal of 21 confirmed tumor responses among the first 41 evaluable patients, paclitaxel polyglumex and capecitabine is well tolerated and effective in MBC.

Project description:Background Paclitaxel is commonly used as first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. However, with response rates of 21.5–53.7% and significant risk of peripheral neuropathy, there is need for better chemotherapy. Patients and methods This open-label phase II/III trial randomised HER2-negative MBC patients 1:1 to either 6 cycles of three-weekly cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2), or, weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) over 18 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), time to response (TTR), overall survival (OS), safety and tolerability and quality of life (QoL). Results 158 patients were recruited. Comparing cabazitaxel to paclitaxel, median PFS was 6.7 vs 5.8 months (HR 0.87; 80%CI 0.70–1.08, P = 0.4). There was no difference in median OS (20.6 vs 18.2 months, HR 1.00; 95%CI 0.69–1.45, P = 0.99), ORR (41.8% vs 36.7%) or TTR (HR 1.09; 95%CI 0.68–1.75, P = 0.7). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 41.8% on cabazitaxel and 46.8% on paclitaxel; the most common being neutropenia (16.5%) and febrile neutropenia (12.7%) cabazitaxel and neutropenia (8.9%) and lung infection (7.6%) paclitaxel. Peripheral neuropathy of any grade occurred in 54.5% paclitaxel vs 16.5% cabazitaxel. Mean EQ-5D-5L single index utility score (+0.05; 95%CI 0.004–0.09, P = 0.03) and visual analogue scale score (+7.7; 95%CI 3.1–12.3, P = 0.001) were higher in cabazitaxel vs paclitaxel. Conclusions Three-weekly cabazitaxel in HER2-negative MBC does not significantly improve PFS compared to weekly paclitaxel, although it has a lower risk of peripheral neuropathy with better patient reported QoL outcomes. It is well tolerated and requires fewer hospital visits. Graphical abstract Image 1 Highlights • 3 weekly Cabazitaxel does not significantly improve PFS versus weekly paclitaxel.• PFS and OS were similar between 3 weekly Cabazitaxel and weekly Paclitaxel.• Cabazitaxel had better overall patient reported health outcomes.• Cabazitaxel had a lower risk of peripheral neuropathy.• Three weekly Cabazitaxel requires fewer hospital visits than weekly Paclitaxel.

Dataset Information

Weekly Paclitaxel plus Capecitabine versus Docetaxel Every 3 Weeks plus Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Publications

Weekly Paclitaxel plus Capecitabine versus Docetaxel Every 3 Weeks plus Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets