4.7 Article

Optimizing docetaxel chemotherapy in patients with cancer of the gastric and Gastroesophageal junction - Evolution of the Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil regimen

期刊

CANCER
卷 113, 期 5, 页码 945-955

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23661

关键词

gastroesophageal cancer; metastatic; locally advanced; chemotherapy; docetaxel

类别

资金

  1. Sanofi-Aventis, US

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advanced gastroesophageal cancer patients are often treated with systemic combination chemotherapy. The V-325 Study demonstrated that adding docetaxel (D) to a frequently used regimen of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) provided benefits with regard to overall survival, response rate, time-to-disease progression, clinical benefit, and health-related quality of life. Although the DCF regimen provides these advantages, it is accompanied by an increase in toxicity compared with the doublet regimen. The toxicity profile of DCF is acceptable only with appropriately selected patients and comprehensive toxicity nianagernent strategies. The objective of the current review was to identify trials that investigated modifications to the original DCF regimen to improve its toxicity profile and summarize response rate and toxicities. An attempt was also made to summarize ongoing modifications of the DCF regimen. MEDLINE, major meeting proceedings, and the government clinical trials website were searched until 2007. The modified DCF regimens appear to improve the toxicity profile when compared with the original DCF regimen. The docetaxel-based triplet combinations appear to have a higher response rate than the doublet combinations. Many institutions and cooperative groups Continue to study docetaxel-based modifications of the DCF regimen to treat patients with gastroesophageal carcinoma. However, although Modified DCF reduces the Frequency of severe toxicities previously reported with DCF, considerably more advances are needed to improve the safety Survival, and convenience of patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据