Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Popov, I.
Right arrow Articles by Nikolic-Tomasevic, Z.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Popov, I.
Right arrow Articles by Nikolic-Tomasevic, Z.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Annals of Oncology 11:343-348, 2000
© 2000 European Society for Medical Oncology

research-article

Eight-hour infusion versus bolus injection of doxorubicin in the EAP regimen in patients with advanced gastric cancer: A prospective randomised trial

I. Popov, S. Jelic, S. Radulovic, D. Radosavljevic and Z. Nikolic-Tomasevic

Institute of Oncology and Radiology of Serbia, Belgrade F.R Yugoslavia

Correspondence to: I. Popov, MD, Institute of Oncology and Radiology of Serbia, Pasterova 14, 11000 Belgrade, F.R. Yugoslavia. E-mail: ipopov{at}ncrc.ac.yu

Background: Doxorubicin (40 mg/m2/cycle), etoposide (360 mg/m2/cycle) and cisplatin (80 mg/m2/cycle) comprise an efficient regimen in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, its excessive hematological toxicity led doctors to avoid using the combination. Doxorubicin is the main cause of myelotoxicity in the EAP regimen. The aim of this study was to compare an eight-hour infusion of doxorubicin (arm A) with intravenous injection of doxorubicin (arm B) in the EAP regimen with respect to toxicity, objective responses, time to progression (TTP) and survival in patients with AGC.

Patients and methods: One-hundred twenty chemotherapy-naïve patients with measurable AGC were randomised between September 1994 and August 1998. Sixty patients in arm A and sixty patients in arm B were considered as fully evaluable. The arms were well balanced for age, sex distribution, previous therapy, histological grade and performance status. One-hundred eighty cycles were applied in arm A (median 2) and 201 in arm B (median 4).

Results: No difference was detected (P = 0.28) in the response rate of arm A 20% (CR 3; PR 9; 95% CI: 10–30) and B 28% (CR 3; PR 14; 95% CI: 17–40). But there was a significant difference in PD (P = 0.005) between arm A (51%) and arm B (36%). TTP (P = 0.01) and survival (P = 0.02) analyses detected an advantage for arm B vs. arm A. Grades 3–4 toxicity were as follows (arms A%/B%): anemia 8/10, leukopenia 24/26, thrombocytopenia 6/16 (significance, P = 0.05), nausea/vomiting 5/8, diarrhea 6/2, mucositis 8/5. Apart from the trombocytopenia, there was no significant difference in toxicity grades 3–4 between the two arms. Four treatment-related deaths occurred, two in each arm.

Conclusions: Bolus injection of doxorubicin is superior to eight-hour doxorubicin infusion in the EAP regimen in terms of survival, TTP and PD without being significantly more toxic.

advanced disease, doxorubicin, drug administration, gastric cancer


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.