4.6 Article

Weekly docetaxel and prednisolone versus prednisolone alone in androgen-independent prostate cancer: A randomized phase II study

期刊

EUROPEAN UROLOGY
卷 52, 期 6, 页码 1691-1699

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.01.104

关键词

androgen-independent; prostate cancer; prednisolone; prostate-specific antigen; response; survival; taxotere

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Due to its palliative effect and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decrease, many clinicians have considered prednisolone monotherapy to be the standard systemic treatment in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer (AIPC). This approach should be compared with docetaxel (Taxotere) + prednisolone. Methods: A total of 109 eligible patients were entered into a randomized phase II study (arm A: Taxotere + prednisolone [30 mg m(-2) weekly during 5 of 6 wk + prednisolone 5 mg x 2 per os daily]; arm B: prednisolone [5 mg x 2 per os daily]). Biochemical response (confirmed >= 50% PSA reduction of the baseline level at 6 wk) was the primary endpoint with subjective progression, quality of life, and progression-free and overall survival as secondary outcomes. Results: Biochemical response at 6 wk was recorded in 29 of 54 evaluable patients in arm A (54%; 95% Cl: 40-67%) and 13 of 50 patients in arm B (26%; 95% Cl: 14-38%), with similar response rates at 12 wk and if based on all eligible patients. Median progression-free survival was 11 mo (95% Cl: 5.8-16.2 mo) in arm A and 4 mo in arm B (95% CI: 2.4-5.6 mo). Median overall survival was 27 mo in arm A (95% Cl: 19.8-34.1 mo) and 18 mo in arm B (95% CI: 15.2-20.8 mo). Pain relief and quality-of-life assessment indicated superiority of the arm A treatment, without unacceptable toxicity. Conclusion: Docetaxel + prednisolone should become the first-line systemic standard treatment for AIPC as a more effective treatment than prednisolone monotherapy. Weekly applications of docetaxel are well tolerated. (c) 2007 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据