PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, particularly in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated 2(nd)-line or greater metastatic breast cancer, and to compare gemcitabine monotherapy (G) with two gemcitabine-based doublets, gemcitabine/vinorelbine (GV) and gemcitabine/capecitabine (GX). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 124 consecutive patients who progressed after anthracycline- and taxane-containing chemotherapy, 58 received G alone, 38 received GV, and 28 received GX; their outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The median number of prior metastatic chemotherapy regimens was 2 (range 0 approximately 4). Visceral metastases were observed in 65 patients (51.4%). The overall response rate was 19.3% (21 partial responses). After a median follow-up period of 21.4 months, the overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.5 approximately 9.6 months) and the median time to progression was 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.0 approximately 4.2 months). Compared with monotherapy (G), combination therapy with vinorelbine or capecitabine (GV/GX) was associated with a significantly higher response rate (8.2% vs. 28.3%, p=0.008) and a significantly longer median time to progression (2.8 vs. 3.5 months; p=0.028), but overall survival did not differ between the groups (7.4 vs. 8.2 months, respectively; p=0.54). Most of the adverse treatment-related events were mild to moderate in intensity. The most common adverse event was hematologic toxicity. Multivariate analysis showed that poor performance status and a short disease-free interval were independent prognostic factors for impaired overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine with vinorelbine or capecitabine was an active and well-tolerated treatment option for taxane- and anthracycline-pretreated 2(nd)-line or greater metastatic breast cancer patients, and gemcitabine-based doublets were more beneficial than gemcitabine monotherapy in alleviating symptoms for these patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: