Combination versus sequential single agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dear RF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8094913 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Compared with treatment options for early-stage breast cancer, few data exist regarding the optimal use of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The choice of using a combination of cytotoxic chemotherapies vs sequential single agents is controversial. At the 6th European Breast Cancer Conference, the European School of Oncology Metastatic Breast Cancer Task Force convened an open debate on the relative benefits of combination vs sequential therapy. Based on the available data, the Task Force recommends sequential monotherapy as the preferred choice in advanced disease, in the absence of rapid clinical progression, life-threatening visceral metastases, or the need for rapid symptom and/or disease control. Patient- and disease-related factors should be used to choose between combination and sequential single-agent chemotherapy for MBC. Additional research is needed to determine the impact of therapy on patient-rated quality of life and to identify predictive factors that can be used to guide therapy.
| S-EPMC2736293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although combination chemotherapy (CC) is generally recommended in recurrent or primary metastatic gastric cancer (RPMGC), the results of randomized trials are conflicting. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted on 687 RPMGC patients who received palliative chemotherapy. We compared the overall survival (OS) between CC and single-agent chemotherapy (SC) among these patients, and we analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics affecting outcome including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). RESULTS:Although 521 patients (75.8%) underwent CC, SC was more frequently performed in elderly patients (57.6%) and ECOG performance status (PS) 2 or 3 (65.8%) patients (p?<?0.0001, in each case). The median OS of patients who received CC was significantly longer than that of patients who received SC (11 vs. 8?months, p?<?0.0001). No difference in OS between CC and SC was observed in elderly patients (p?=?0.583), poor PS (p?=?0.810), signet ring cell (p?=?0.347), palliative surgical resection (p?=?0.307), and high PLR (p?=?0.120), with a significant interaction between age and type of regimen (p?=?0.012). Moreover, there was no difference in OS between CC and SC after propensity score matching (p?=?0.322). Multivariate analysis revealed that palliative resection and???second-line chemotherapy were independently associated with favorable OS (p?<?0.0001, in each case), whereas poor PS (p?=?0.004), signet ring cell (p?<?0.0001), peritoneal metastasis (p?=?0.04), high NLR (p?=?0.001), and high PLR (p?=?0.033) were independent prognostic factors of poor OS. CONCLUSIONS:Although CC is the standard of care in RPMGC, SC can be considered a reasonable option in certain subgroups, such as elderly patients.
| S-EPMC7052983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeNCCTG (North Central Cancer Treatment Group) N9831 is the only randomized phase III trial evaluating trastuzumab added sequentially or used concurrently with chemotherapy in resected stages I to III invasive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer.Patients and methodsPatients received doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by paclitaxel weekly for 12 weeks (arm A), paclitaxel plus sequential trastuzumab weekly for 52 weeks (arm B), or paclitaxel plus concurrent trastuzumab for 12 weeks followed by trastuzumab for 40 weeks (arm C). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).ResultsComparison of arm A (n = 1,087) and arm B (n = 1,097), with 6-year median follow-up and 390 events, revealed 5-year DFS rates of 71.8% and 80.1%, respectively. DFS was significantly increased with trastuzumab added sequentially to paclitaxel (log-rank P < .001; arm B/arm A hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.85). Comparison of arm B (n = 954) and arm C (n = 949), with 6-year median follow-up and 313 events, revealed 5-year DFS rates of 80.1% and 84.4%, respectively. There was an increase in DFS with concurrent trastuzumab and paclitaxel relative to sequential administration (arm C/arm B HR, 0.77; 99.9% CI, 0.53 to 1.11), but the P value (.02) did not cross the prespecified O'Brien-Fleming boundary (.00116) for the interim analysis.ConclusionDFS was significantly improved with 52 weeks of trastuzumab added to adjuvant chemotherapy. On the basis of a positive risk-benefit ratio, we recommend that trastuzumab be incorporated into a concurrent regimen with taxane chemotherapy as an important standard-of-care treatment alternative to a sequential regimen.
| S-EPMC3236650 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To investigate the efficacy and safety of doublet versus single-agent chemotherapy (CT) plus trastuzumab (H) as first-line therapy for human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS:We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the treatment effects of single-agent or doublet CT+H as first-line therapies for HER2-positive MBC. The main outcomes measured for this study included the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed, and the study quality was evaluated using the GRADE framework. The PROSPERO registry number of our analysis is CRD42016043766. RESULTS:The results from four RCTs including 1044 participants were pooled. Moderate-quality evidence indicated that compared with single-agent CT+H, doublet CT+H correlated better with prolonged PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.75, P < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.88-0.92, P < 0.0001). However, moderate-quality evidence revealed no significant difference between the two regimens regarding the ORR (relative risk [RR] = 1.07, 95% CI 0.98-1.17, P = 0.157), which was confirmed by TSA, indicating that the cumulative Z-curve entered the futility area. Moderate-quality evidence indicated that treatment-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities of thrombocytopenia (RR = 4.08, P = 0.000), nausea/vomiting (RR = 4.26, P = 0.002), diarrhea (RR = 2.81, P = 0.002), and stomatitis (RR = 5.02, P = 0.003) were observed more frequently with doublet CT+H than with single-agent CT+H. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with single-agent CT, the combination of doublet CT with trastuzumab as first-line therapy for HER2-positive MBC is associated with longer PFS and OS, but more treatment-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Therefore, doublet CT appears to be an appropriate regimen for HER2-positive MBC with a good performance status.
| S-EPMC5838135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nowadays, the philosophy of treating metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is slowly evolving. Especially for the anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients, no standard therapy exists in this setting. Whether to choose doublet agents or single agent as salvage treatment remains fiercely debated. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to resolve this problem. Databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched for Phase III randomized clinical trials (published before August 2015) comparing the efficacy and adverse effects between the combination therapy and single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients. The primary end point was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary end points were the progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or 4 toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were used to evaluate the efficacy. Analyses were also performed to estimate the side effects and safety of both groups. In all, nine eligible randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. Improvements were proven in the doublet agents group on OS (HR 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.96, P=0.002), PFS (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76-0.88, P<0.001), and ORR (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.34-2.21, P<0.001). Notably, subgroup analysis failed to favor the targeted agent-based combination in terms of OS (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.31, P=0.365), PFS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88-1.35, P=0.433), and ORR (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.69-3.71, P=0.278) compared with single agent. In addition, although more hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed in the doublet agents group, they were acceptable and manageable. Taken together, when compared with single-agent therapy, doublet agents should be considered a treatment option because of the superior efficacy and the manageable safety profile for the prior anthracycline- and taxane-treated MBC patients.
| S-EPMC4938138 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tumor microenvironment is a significant physical barrier to the effective delivery of chemotherapy into solid tumors. To overcome this challenge, tumors are pretreated with an agent that reduces cellular and extracellular matrix densities prior to chemotherapy. However, it also comes with a concern that metastasis may increase due to the loss of protective containment. We hypothesize that timely priming at the early stage of primary tumors will help control metastasis. To test this, we primed orthotopic 4T1 breast tumors with a paclitaxel (PTX)-loaded iron-oxide-decorated poly(lactic- co-glycolic acid) nanoparticle (NP) composite (PTX@PINC), which can be quickly concentrated in target tissues with the aid of an external magnet, and monitored its effect on the delivery of subsequently administered NPs. Magnetic resonance imaging and optical whole-body imaging confirmed that PTX@PINC was efficiently delivered to tumors by the external magnet and help loosen the tumors to accommodate subsequently delivered NPs. Consistently, the primed tumors responded to Doxil better than nonprimed tumors. In addition, lung metastasis was significantly reduced in the animals PINC-primed prior to Doxil administration. These results support that PINC combined with magnetophoresis can facilitate the timely management of primary tumors with a favorable secondary effect on metastasis.
| S-EPMC6542733 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5970002 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRegorafenib has been demonstrated as effective in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Combination use with chemotherapy has not been reported. We examined the efficacy and safety of adding chemotherapy to Regorafenib for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC) patients.MethodsWe recruited mCRC patients at our institute who received either regorafenib monotherapy or regorafenib in combination with other chemotherapies. All patients had received chemo and target therapies and presented with disease progression before regorafenib treatment. The primary end point was overall survival.FindingsBetween September1, 2015 and May 31, 2017, 100 mCRC patients at our institute received regorafenib treatment. 39 patients were excluded due to poor performance, lack of timely treatment, or inadequate clinical data. A total of 34 patients received regorafenib combined with other chemotherapies, and 27 patients received regorafenib alone. Median follow up time was 10.4 and 6.1 months, respectively. The primary end point of median OS was higher in the combination group than in the single use group (20.9m vs 10.3m, p = 0.015). The most frequent adverse events were hand-foot skin reactions(16[47.1%]vs 12[44.4%]), fatigue(6[17.6%] vs 7[25.9%]), gastrointestinal discomfort (7[20.6%] vs 6[22.2%]), neutropenia (4[11.8%] vs 1[3.7%]), diarrhea(4[11.8%] vs 1[3.7%]), and mucositis(5[14.7%] vs 1[3.7%]).ConclusionThe present study showed the efficacy and side effects of regorafenib combination treatment. Superiority in median OS and median PFS was noted in the combination group. The sampling difference between the study and observation groups effects justifies the comparison. Further clinical evidence of combination therapy efficacy is pending future studies.
| S-EPMC5755875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSingle-agent oral vinorelbine is a standard of care for hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) that has progressed on endocrine therapy. Metronomic administration may offer a better balance of efficacy and safety than standard regimens, but data from previous trials are scarce.MethodsIn this open-label, multicenter, phase II trial, patients were randomized to oral vinorelbine administered on a metronomic (50 mg three times weekly) or weekly (60 mg/m2 in cycle 1, increasing to 80 mg/m2 if well tolerated) schedule. Treatment was continued until disease progression or intolerance. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR, the proportion of patients with a best overall confirmed response of CR, PR, or stable disease lasting 6 months or more).ResultsOne-hundred sixty-three patients were randomized and treated. The DCR was 63.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.0-73.8) with metronomic vinorelbine and 72.8% (95% CI: 61.8-82.1) with weekly vinorelbine. Weekly vinorelbine was also associated with longer progression-free survival (5.6 vs 4.0 months) and overall survival (26.7 vs 22.3 months) than metronomic vinorelbine, but was associated with more adverse events.ConclusionsIn this randomized phase II trial, single-agent metronomic oral vinorelbine was effective and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative ABC. Formal comparisons are not done in this phase II study and one can simply observe that confidence intervals of all endpoints overlap. When deciding for a chemotherapy after failure of endocrine therapy and CDK 4/6 inhibitors, oral vinorelbine might be an option to be given with either schedule.Clinical trial registration numberEudraCT 2014-003860-19.
| S-EPMC10891320 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:In MONARCH 1 (NCT02102490), single-agent abemaciclib demonstrated promising efficacy activity and tolerability in a population of heavily pretreated women with refractory HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC). To help interpret these results and put in clinical context, we compared overall survival (OS) and duration of therapy (DoT) between MONARCH 1 and a real-world single-agent chemotherapy cohort. METHODS:The real-world chemotherapy cohort was created from a Flatiron Health electronic health records-derived database based on key eligibility criteria from MONARCH 1. The chemotherapies included in the cohort were single-agent capecitabine, gemcitabine, eribulin, or vinorelbine. Results were adjusted for baseline demographics and clinical differences using Mahalanobis distance matching (primary analysis) and entropy balancing (sensitivity analysis). OS and DoT were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS:A real-world single-agent chemotherapy cohort (n?=?281) with eligibility criteria similar to the MONARCH 1 population (n?=?132) was identified. The MONARCH 1 (n?=?108) cohort was matched to the real-world chemotherapy cohort (n?=?108). Median OS was 22.3 months in the abemaciclib arm versus 13.6 months in the matched real-world chemotherapy cohort with an estimated hazard ratio (HR) of 0.54. The median DoT was 4.1 months in MONARCH 1 compared to 2.9 months in the real-world chemotherapy cohort with HR of 0.76. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates an approach to create a real-world chemotherapy cohort suitable to serve as a comparator for trial data. These exploratory results suggest a survival advantage and place the benefit of abemaciclib monotherapy in clinical context.
| S-EPMC7568708 | biostudies-literature