4.7 Article

Seven year update of an EORTC phase III trial of high-dose intensity M-VAC chemotherapy and G-CSF versus classic M-VAC in advanced urothelial tract tumours

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 42, 期 1, 页码 50-54

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.08.032

关键词

transitional cell carcinoma; bladder cancer; M-VAC chemotherapy; randomized trial; EORTC

类别

资金

  1. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [U10CA011488] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NCI NIH HHS [5U10 CA11488-35, 5U10 CA11488-22] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

EORTC protocol 30924 is an international randomized trial reporting a 7.3 year update of a 2 weekly regimen of high-dose intensity chemotherapy with M-VAC plus granulocyte colony stimulating factor (HD-M-VAC) compared to classic M-VAC in advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TCC). Two hundred and sixty three untreated patients with bidimensionally measurable TCC were included. In an intention to treat (ITT) analysis, there were 28 complete responses (CR) (21%) and 55 partial responses (PR) (41%), for an overall response rate (RR) of 64% on the HD-M-VAC arm. On M-VAC, there were 12 CR (9%) and 53 PR (41%), for an overall RR of 50% The P-value for the difference in CR was 0.009; and for RR, was 0.06. After a median follow-up of 7.3 years, 24.6% are alive on the HD-M-VAC arm vs. 13.2% on the M-VAC arm. Median progression-free survival was better with HD-MVAC (9.5 months) vs. M-VAC (8.1 months). The mortality hazard ratio (HR) was 0.76. The 2-year survival rate for HD-M-VAC was 36.7% vs. 26.2% for M-VAC. At 5 years, the survival rate was 21.8% in the HD-M-VAC vs. 13.5%. Median survival was 15.1 months on HD-MVAC and 14.9 months on M-VAC. There was one death from toxicity in each arm; and more patients died to malignant disease in the M-VAC arm (76%) than in the HD-M-VAC arm (64.9%). With longer follow-up initial results have been confirmed, and shows that HD-M-VAC produces a borderline statistically significant relative reduction in the risk of progression and death compared to M-VAC. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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