PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 13, 2003Journal of Clinical Oncology710 citations

Phase III Trial of Doxorubicin, Paclitaxel, and the Combination of Doxorubicin and Paclitaxel as Front-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Intergroup Trial (E1193)

View Full Paper
GSGeorge W. SledgeDNDonna NeubergPBPatricia Bernardo

Key Result

Combination therapy with doxorubicin and paclitaxel yielded superior response rates (47% vs 36% and 34%) and time to treatment failure compared to single agents, but did not improve survival.

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=739)

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel improve survival or response rates compared to single-agent therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer?

P
Population
739 patients with metastatic breast cancer
I
Intervention
Combination of doxorubicin (50 mg/m2) and paclitaxel (150 mg/m2/24 h) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (5 mg/kg) as first-line therapy
C
Comparator
Single-agent doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) or single-agent paclitaxel (175 mg/m2/24 h), with crossover at progression
O
Outcome
Response rate, time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall survivalhard clinical

Combination therapy with doxorubicin and paclitaxel improves response rates and time to treatment failure but does not improve overall survival compared to sequential single-agent therapy in metastatic breast cancer.

Main Result

p-value: p=0.007 vs doxorubicin, 0.004 vs paclitaxel

Abstract

PURPOSE: Between February 1993 and September 1995, 739 patients with metastatic breast cancer were entered on an Intergroup trial (E1193) comparing doxorubicin (60 mg/m(2)), paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)/24 h), and the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT, 50 mg/m(2) and 150 mg/m(2)/24 h, plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor 5 mg/kg) as first-line therapy. Patients receiving single-agent doxorubicin or paclitaxel were crossed over to the other agent at time of progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were well balanced for on-study characteristics. RESULTS: Responses (complete response and partial response) were seen in 36% of doxorubicin, 34% of paclitaxel, and 47% of AT patients (P =.84 for doxorubicin v paclitaxel, P =.007 for v AT, P =.004 for paclitaxel v AT). Median time to treatment failure (TTF) is 5.8, 6.0, and 8.0 months for doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and AT, respectively (P =.68 for doxorubicin v paclitaxel, P =.003 for doxorubicin v AT, P =.009 for paclitaxel v AT). Median survivals are 18.9 months for patients taking doxorubicin, 22.2 months for patients taking paclitaxel, and 22.0 months for patients taking AT (P = not significant). Responses were seen in 20% of patients crossing from doxorubicin --> paclitaxel and 22% of patients crossing from paclitaxel --> doxorubicin (P = not significant). Changes in global quality-of-life measurements from on-study to week 16 were similar in all three groups. CONCLUSION: (1) doxorubicin and paclitaxel, in the doses used here, have equivalent activity; (2) the combination of AT results in superior overall response rates and time to TTF; and (3) despite these results, combination therapy with AT did not improve either survival or quality of life compared to sequential single-agent therapy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sledge et al. (2003) conducted an RCT in Metastatic breast cancer (n=739). Combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) vs. doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2/24 h) was evaluated on Responses (complete response and partial response) (p=0.007 vs doxorubicin, 0.004 vs paclitaxel). Combination therapy with doxorubicin and paclitaxel yielded superior response rates (47% vs 36% and 34%) and time to treatment failure compared to single agents, but did not improve survival.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1921d3a7ec0a017d2650c3https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2003.08.013
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper