Phase III Trial of Epirubicin Plus Paclitaxel Compared With Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide As First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Trial AB01
- 20 November 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 23 (33) , 8322-8330
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.01.1817
Abstract
To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of epirubicin and paclitaxel (EP) with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy (except for adjuvant therapy) were randomly assigned to receive either EP (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2) or EC (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary outcome was progression-free survival; secondary outcome measures were overall survival, response rates, and toxicity. Between 1996 and 1999, 705 patients (353 EP patients and 352 EC patients) underwent random assignment. Patient characteristics were well matched between the two groups, and 71% of patients received six cycles of treatment. Objective response rates were 65% for the EP group and 55% for the EC group (P = .015). At the time of analysis, 641 patients (91%) had died. Median progression-free survival time was 7.0 months for the EP group and 7.1 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.24; P = .41), and median overall survival time was 13 months for the EP group and 14 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.19; P = .8). EP patients, compared with EC patients, had more grade 3 and 4 mucositis (6% v 2%, respectively; P = .0006) and grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity (5% v 1%, respectively; P < .0001). In terms of progression-free survival and overall survival, there was no evidence of a difference between EP and EC. The data demonstrate no additional advantage to using EP instead of EC as first-line chemotherapy for MBC in taxane-naïve patients.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Paclitaxel and epirubicin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer: a phase III study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology GroupAnnals of Oncology, 2004
- Cancer Statistics, 2004CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2004
- Docetaxel and Doxorubicin Compared With Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide as First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: Results of a Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2003
- Doxorubicin-paclitaxelCancer, 2002
- Doxorubicin versus methotrexate both combined with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil and tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer—a randomised study with more than 10 years follow-up from the danish breast cancer cooperative groupEuropean Journal Of Cancer, 1999
- Combined doxorubicin and paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer: Effective and cardiotoxicAnnals of Oncology, 1996
- A multicentre phase II study of the efficacy and safety of docetaxel as first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer: Report of the Clinical Screening Group of the EORTCAnnals of Oncology, 1996
- Epirubicin and doxorubicin: a comparison of their characteristics, therapeutic activity and toxicityCancer Treatment Reviews, 1993
- Phase II Trial of Taxol, an Active Drug in the Treatment of Metastatic Breast CancerJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1991
- A comparison of intermittent vs. continuous and of adriamycin vs. methotrexate 5-drug chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer A Cancer and Leukemia Group B studyAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1984