Key result
4'epidoxorubicin treatment in previously untreated hepatocellular carcinoma resulted in a 17% response rate (3 of 18 patients), with mild toxicity.
Why the study?
Does epirubicin induce tumor response in patients with untreated hepatocellular carcinoma?
Does epirubicin induce tumor response in patients with untreated hepatocellular carcinoma?
Epirubicin demonstrates a 17% response rate in untreated hepatocellular carcinoma, appearing equivalent to doxorubicin but with potentially decreased toxicity, though dose-dependent cardiotoxicity remains a risk.
May support epirubicin evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma trials; leaves open comparative efficacy and cardiotoxicity versus doxorubicin.
Doxorubicin provides the most consistent response rate in hepatocellular carcinoma. We therefore initiated a trial with its analog 4'epidoxorubicin. Eighteen patients, all without prior treatment, were given the drug as a single agent every 3 weeks with dose escalation whenever possible. Five patients were treated by six-hour infusion and 13 by intravenous (IV) bolus injection, with the median dose being 90 mg/m2. The patients were of diverse ethnic background and included some with underlying cirrhosis and hepatitis B surface antigenemia. Three patients had partial remissions (6, 12, 48 weeks) for a response rate of 17%. Four patients also had prolonged stable disease (14, 26, 27, 38 weeks). Toxicity was mild, although cardiac toxicity developed in three patients at 685, 825, and 1,460 mg/m2 cumulative dose. The response to 4'epidoxorubicin in this study appears to be equivalent to the reported response rates for doxorubicin, with decreased toxicity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Höchster et al. (1985) studied Hepatocellular carcinoma (n=18). 4'epidoxorubicin (epirubicin) was evaluated on Response rate. 4'epidoxorubicin treatment in previously untreated hepatocellular carcinoma resulted in a 17% response rate (3 of 18 patients), with mild toxicity.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: