The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of several new approaches designed to enhance the activity of fluorouracil (5-FU) in the management of advanced colorectal cancer. A total of 429 patients were randomized to one of the following regimens: single-agent 5-FU, given by standard 5-day, intensive-course intravenous bolus technique; 5-FU plus high-dose folinic acid (leucovorin) or 5-FU plus low-dose leucovorin; 5-FU plus high-dose methotrexate (MTX) with oral leucovorin rescue; 5-FU plus low-dose MTX; and 5-FU plus cisplatin (CDDP). The median survival for patients receiving 5-FU alone was 7.7 months. The high- and low-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU regimens had median survivals of 12.2 and 12.0 months, respectively, and offered a significant survival advantage over 5-FU alone with one-sided P values of .037 and .050, respectively (P = .051 for each treatment after correction for prognostic variables). The only other regimen possibly associated with improved survival was high-dose MTX plus 5-FU, with a median survival of 10.5 months (P = .21, P = .076 corrected). In addition, both high- and low-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU regimens were associated with significantly improved tumor response rates (P = .04 and .001) and significantly improved interval-to-tumor-progression rates (P = .015 and .007) when compared with 5-FU alone. Only the low-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU regimen was associated with significant (P less than .05) superiority in each of the following parameters of quality of life: performance status, weight gain, and symptomatic relief. The overall most therapeutically favorable regimen in this trial was 5-FU given with low-dose leucovorin; fortuitously, this regimen is associated with very low drug cost. Whereas this is the first study to demonstrate both improved palliation and survival for any regimen compared with 5-FU given by rapid intravenous (IV) injection for 5 consecutive days at a dose of 500 mg/m2/d in patients with advanced colorectal cancer, the magnitude of the gain is still relatively small. Our low-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU regimen is currently being studied in a national trial with the hope that this increased advanced disease activity may produce more substantive gains in the surgical adjuvant setting.
A randomized trial was performed to determine if therapy with tamoxifen (TAM) plus fluoxymesterone (FLU) was more efficacious than TAM alone for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Patients failing TAM could subsequently receive FLU. The dose of both drugs was 10 mg orally twice daily. Objective responses were seen in 50 of 119 (42%) TAM patients and 64 of 119 (54%) TAM plus FLU patients (two-sided P = 0.07). Time to disease progression was better for TAM plus FLU (medians: 11.6 versus 6.5 months; Cox model, P = 0.03). Duration of response and survival were similar in the two treatment arms. Among 97 patients with estrogen receptor (ER) of 10 or greater and 65 years of age or older, there were highly significant advantages for treatment with TAM plus FLU in both response rate and time to progression. Of particular note is that in this patient group TAM plus FLU showed a survival advantage (Cox model, P = 0.05). Although these data require confirmation in a prospective randomized trial, they suggest that there is a substantive therapeutic advantage for TAM plus FLU over TAM alone in elderly women with ER of 10 fmol or greater.
FAMe, FAP, or FAMe alternating with TZT cannot be recommended for the therapy of advanced gastric carcinoma. Therapy of this disease should remain an experimental endeavor. It would seem reasonable to prove the value of any new treatment approach by a randomized comparison to simple therapy with 5-FU alone.
Although paclitaxel CL(tb) decreases with increasing patient age, there is great interpatient variability. Cooperative group studies to evaluate the effect of aging on pharmacokinetics are feasible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.