SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fields, K. K.
Right arrow Articles by Elfenbein, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Fields, K. K.
Right arrow Articles by Elfenbein, G. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Optimization of high-dose therapy for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer

Karen K. Fields

Division of Bone Marrow Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida

James S. Partyka

Division of Bone Marrow Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida

Janelle B. Perkins

Division of Bone Marrow Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida

Gerald J. Elfenbein

Division of Bone Marrow Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida

Objective. To determine the effect of chemorespon siveness and dose intensity on event-free survival (EFS) for metastatic breast cancer patients following high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell rescue.

Design. This is a retrospective review of data from three allocated, parallel, dose escalation, high dose phase I/II trials.

Setting. These trials were carried out at H. Lee Moffitt Cancer, Tampa, Florida.

Patients. Since October 1989, 215 patients with metastatic (stage IV) breast cancer receiving the following high-dose treatment regimens with stem cell rescue: (1) ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE); (2) mitoxantrone and thiotepa (MITT); and (3) Taxol, Novantrone, thiotepa (TNT).

Intervention. Patients received either escalating doses of ICE (ifosfamide 6000 to 24,000 mg/m 2, carboplatin 1200 to 2100 mg/m2, etoposide 1800 to 3000 mg/m2), or MITT (mitoxantrone 45 to 105 mg/m2, thiotepa 900 to 1350 mg/m2) or TNT (thiote pa 900 mg/m2, Novantrone 45 to 75 mg/m2, Taxol 120 to 360 mg/m2) followed by stem cell rescue. Patients were then grouped by degree of dose inten sity and chemoresponsiveness.

Main Outcome Measures. EFS curves were generated by the Kaplan-Meier product limit method and compared by log rank or Kruskal-Wallis analysis. Events were defined as disease progression or death (from whatever cause) which ever came first. P values reported are two-tailed.

Results. Probability of EFS (±SE) for all 215 metastatic breast cancer patients treated with ICE divided by degree of dose intensity (Phase I—lower dose intensity vs Phase II— higher dose intensity) at 3 years is 2.4 ± 2.3% for Phase I patients as compared with 18.4 ± 3.8% for phase II patients (P = .0951). The EFS for Phase II anthracycline responsive patients (n = 42) at 2 years is 36 ± 10%, 33 ± 19%, 29 ± 17% for MITT, ICE dose 11 through 15, and ICE dose level 16, respectively. The EFS for TNT at 5 months is 43 ± 19%. Overall percentages of toxic deaths were higher for patients receiving MITT (32%) and TNT (29%) as compared with the patients receiving ICE (8%) (P = .24). These differences are mainly attributed to an increased risk of cardiac toxicity in patients treated with MITT or TNT. All phase II patients (n = 139) treated with ICE, MITT and TNT were categorized by chemotherapy sensitivity status, the EFS at 3 years for the anthracycline responsive group is 31 ± 8%, as compared with for the anthracycline refractory/mini- ICE (lower doses of ICE) responsive group 19 ± 9% and 0% for the refractory group (P = .004).

Conclusions. These results suggest that ICE, MITT, and TNT in the high-dose setting suggests that there may be a therapeutic advantage for delivering "highest" dose intensive therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. When all phase II patients treated with ICE, MITT, and TNT were categorized by chemotherapy sensitivity status, a significant differ ence in EFS among the three categories of sensitivity to anthracyclines and mini-ICE was observed. Further study of dose intensity in the setting of high-dose therapy for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer is warranted.

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, Vol. 2, No. 1 Suppl, 11-17 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/1078155296002001031


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement