Concomitant versus sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel as first‐line therapy in metastatic breast carcinoma
- 2 August 2004
- Vol. 101 (4) , 704-712
- https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20400
Abstract
BACKGROUND The authors performed a randomized trial comprising patients with metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC). They used a noninferiority design to evaluate whether the results of sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel were not markedly worse than the concomitant administration in terms of objective response rates (ORRs). Toxicity profile, quality of life (QOL), and pharmacoeconomic evaluations were evaluated as well. METHODS In the current study, 202 patients with MBC were randomized to receive either the combination of epirubicin at a dose of 90 mg/m2 plus paclitaxel at a dose of 200 mg/m2 for 8 cycles (concomitant arm, n = 108) or epirubicin at a dose of 120 mg/m2 for 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel at a dose of 250 mg/m2 over 3 hours for 4 cycles every 21 days (sequential arm, n = 94). RESULTS The authors rejected the null hypothesis that the sequential treatment is less active than the standard concomitant regimen (ORRs: concomitant = 58.5%, sequential = 57.6%). The median progression‐free and overall survival periods were 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 9.7–12.3) and 20.0 months (95% CI, 17.2–22.6), respectively, in the concomitant arm and 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.9–13.6) and 26 months (95% CI, 18.1–33.8), respectively, in the sequential arm (P = not significant). Patients who received the sequential regimen experienced a higher incidence of Grade 3/4 (according to the World Health Organization grading system) neutropenia (62.2% of courses vs. 50.62%; P = 0.003) and Grade ≥ 2 neuropathy (45.5% vs. 30.4% of patients; P = 0.03), whereas 6 patients who received the concomitant regimen developed Grade II cardiotoxicity according to New York Heart Association criteria. QOL analyses failed to provide clear differences. CONCLUSIONS The sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel at full doses was found to be as active as their association. Therefore, both the sequential and the combined administration were acceptable options. Cancer 2004. © 2004 American Cancer Society.Keywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cardiac function following combination therapy with paclitaxel and doxorubicin: An analysis of 657 women with advanced breast cancerAnnals of Oncology, 2001
- Sequence Effect of Epirubicin and Paclitaxel Treatment on Pharmacokinetics and ToxicityJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2000
- Cardiotoxicity of Epirubicin/Paclitaxel–Containing Regimens: Role of Cardiac Risk FactorsJournal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
- Pharmacokinetic optimisation of treatment schedules for anthracyclines and paclitaxel in patients with cancer.Clinical Pharmacokinetics, 1999
- Do patients with advanced breast cancer benefit from chemotherapy?British Journal of Cancer, 1998
- Dose-finding study and pharmacokinetics of epirubicin and paclitaxel over 3 hours: a regimen with high activity and low cardiotoxicity in advanced breast cancer.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1997
- Human pharmacokinetic characterization and in vitro study of the interaction between doxorubicin and paclitaxel in patients with breast cancer.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1997
- Combined doxorubicin and paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer: Effective and cardiotoxicAnnals of Oncology, 1996
- Long-term follow-up of patients with complete remission following combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1996
- Paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion in combination with bolus doxorubicin in women with untreated metastatic breast cancer: high antitumor efficacy and cardiac effects in a dose-finding and sequence-finding study.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1995