Article

Decreased dose density of standard chemotherapy does not compromise survival for ovarian cancer patients

Department of Oncology and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
International Journal of Gynecological Cancer (Impact Factor: 1.95). 01/2008; 18(1):8-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.00990.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer, the standard practice of surgery followed by adjuvant platinum-taxane combination chemotherapy, with cycles administered every 3 weeks, is based on randomized control trials. However, a substantial number of patients require delays or reductions on this schedule. The Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario (CCSEO) has historically administered chemotherapy every 4 weeks. We analyzed survival outcomes of our cohort. All ovarian cancer patients treated with chemotherapy at the CCSEO from 1995 to end-2002 were included in this study. Overall survival and progression-free survival were calculated from initiation of chemotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier technique and log-rank tests. Cox regression analysis was used to adjust for age and disease stage. A total of 171 patients were treated with chemotherapy (cisplatin-paclitaxel or carboplatin-paclitaxel), of which 144 received chemotherapy every 4 weeks and 27 every 3 weeks. Median progression-free survival was 19.2 months for the group treated every 4 weeks vs 13.2 months for the 3-weekly group. Median overall survival was 36.5 months compared to 27.1 months, respectively. Trends favored treatment every 4 weeks. In early-stage disease, 5-year overall survival was 74% and 5-year progression-free survival was 68%. Administration of platinum-paclitaxel chemotherapy every 4 weeks did not reduce survival of ovarian cancer patients. Importantly, median survival is favorable compared to results from landmark trials where patients were treated every 3 weeks. These results suggest that decreasing the frequency of chemotherapy cycles does not decrease survival. Prospective trials would be required to compare quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

0 Followers
 · 
93 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The rising cost of new molecularly-targeted anticancer drugs has become a major issue in oncology. One small but significant factor contributing to this problem is the routine co-administration of loading doses, which may inflate the cost of the first treatment by as much as US$1000. Here, we question the cost-effectiveness of this practice in cancer patients on several grounds, including non-urgent pace of disease, lack of evidence for survival benefit, weak dose-dependency of biopharmaceutical efficacy in cancer and the unproven validity of the 'volume of distribution' concept applied to target-specific drugs.
    European Journal of Cancer 08/2008; 44(11):1488-92. DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2007.12.006 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the disease control rate (DCR) in heavily pretreated and relapsed ovarian cancer patients re-challenged with a weekly paclitaxel schedule and to establish whether a correlation between dose intensity, progression-free interval (PFI) and overall survival (OS) exists. Retrospective data were collected from 30 heavily pretreated metastatic ovarian cancer patients who received 80 mg/m(2)/week paclitaxel regimen. The treatment was well tolerated and showed a DCR in 70% of the patients, with only one case of grade 3 hematological toxicity. One patient (3%) showed a complete response, 15 patients (50%) a partial response and five patients (17%) a stabilization of their disease. The regimen was mostly used as a fourth-line chemotherapy (range 2-7). The median dose intensity in responding patients was 57.5 mg/m(2)/week and in those with progressive disease 49.7 mg/m(2)/week. (p = 0.20). PFI and OS were increased in the responder patient groups with a log-rank test of 25.64 (p < 0.001) and 15.10 (p = 0.0001), respectively. Weekly administration of paclitaxel was active and well tolerated as a salvage therapy for heavily pretreated ovarian cancer patients.
    Archives of Gynecology 07/2011; 285(2):499-503. DOI:10.1007/s00404-011-1976-9 · 1.28 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads