Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
To assess the feasibility and tolerance of neoadjuvant and concomitant estramustine phosphate and vinblastine (EV) with high-dose three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. ⋯ Neoadjuvant and concomitant EV with high-dose 3D-CRT is well tolerated in patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Although the incidence of modest (grade 2) late GI and GU toxicities seem to be increased compared with 3D-CRT alone or in combination with androgen ablation therapy, no severe toxicities were encountered with this regimen.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Randomized cross-over trial of progenitor-cell mobilization: high-dose cyclophosphamide plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) versus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor plus G-CSF.
Patient response to hematopoietic progenitor-cell mobilizing regimens seems to vary considerably, making comparison between regimens difficult. To eliminate this inter-patient variability, we designed a cross-over trial and prospectively compared the number of progenitors mobilized into blood after granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) days 1 to 12 plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) days 7 to 12 (regimen G) with the number of progenitors after cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF days 3 to 14 (regimen C) in the same patient. ⋯ We report the first clinical trial that used a cross-over design showing that high-dose cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF results in mobilization of more progenitors then GM-CSF plus G-CSF when tested in the same patient regardless of sequence of administration, although the regimen is associated with greater morbidity. Patients who fail to achieve adequate mobilization after regimen G can be treated with regimen C as an effective salvage regimen, whereas patients who fail regimen C are unlikely to benefit from subsequent treatment with regimen G. The cross-over design allowed detection of significant differences between regimens in a small cohort of patients and should be considered in design of future comparisons of mobilization regimens.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Randomized phase II study of docetaxel versus doxorubicin in first- and second-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcomas in adults: a study of the european organization for research and treatment of cancer soft tissue and bone sarcoma group.
To assess antitumor response and time to progression (TTP) with docetaxel compared with doxorubicin in first-line treatment of advanced and/or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. ⋯ Docetaxel is inactive in soft tissue sarcomas and cannot be recommended for further use in treatment of this disease.
-
To identify areas of concern regarding the conduct of phase I trials, the perceived expectations and motivations of the parents of children entered, the expectations of toxicity and benefit, and the ethical concerns of pediatric hematologists and oncologists in the United Kingdom and North America. ⋯ The respondents in this survey expressed mainly ethical concerns regarding the conduct of phase I trials and had realistic expectations of the potential for toxicity and benefit for those children who participate in these studies.