• Eur. J. Cancer · Nov 2017

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study

    Phase II, multicentre, randomised trial of eribulin plus gemcitabine versus paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

    • Yeon Hee Park, Seock-Ah Im, Sung-Bae Kim, Joo Hyuk Sohn, Keun Seok Lee, Yee Soo Chae, Ki Hyeong Lee, Jee Hyun Kim, Young-Hyuck Im, Ji-Yeon Kim, Tae-Yong Kim, Kyung-Hun Lee, Jin-Hee Ahn, Gun Min Kim, In Hae Park, Soo Jung Lee, Hye Sook Han, Se Hyun Kim, Kyung Hae Jung, and Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG).
    • Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
    • Eur. J. Cancer. 2017 Nov 1; 86: 385-393.

    BackgroundPaclitaxel plus gemcitabine (PG) combination chemotherapy is a preferred chemotherapeutic regimen for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Eribulin mesylate is a halichondrin non-taxane inhibitor of microtubule dynamics. A recent pooled analysis with eribulin showed improved overall survival (OS) in various MBC patient subgroups pretreated with anthracycline and taxane. Furthermore, eribulin may have less neurotoxicity than paclitaxel.Patients And MethodsThis study was a prospective randomised phase II, open-label, two-arm, multicentre study comparing eribulin plus gemcitabine (EG) with PG chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative MBC. We hypothesised that EG chemotherapy would not be inferior to PG chemotherapy. The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS), which was estimated to be 70% at 6 months for each arm. The secondary end-points were as follows: OS, neuropathic scale, toxicity and clinical benefit rate.ResultsA total of 118 patients (median age: 50, 24-66) were enrolled between March 2015 and March 2016 and were randomly assigned to PG (n = 59) or EG (n = 59) chemotherapy. The mean number of metastatic sites was 3 (range 1-8). The 6-month PFS rates for both arms were 72% for EG and 73% for PG (P = 0.457). There was no significant difference in OS between the two groups (not reached versus 21.2 months, P = 0.2234). The median number of chemotherapy cycles for both groups was 10 for EG and 8 for PG (range 2-32). Clinical benefit rates were 44% for EG and 49% for PG. Major toxicities were neutropenia and neurotoxicity. Grade II or above neurotoxicity was more common with PG than with EG (13.6% for EG versus 45.8% for PG, P < 0.0001).ConclusionEG chemotherapy had similar clinical benefits to PG chemotherapy in terms of PFS but less neurotoxicity.Trial RegistrationKCSG BR13-11; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02263495.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.