BACKGROUND: It has been reported that treatment with uracil-tegafur (UFT) has shown significantly better survival and relapse-free survival (RFS) than surgery alone. Therefore, we compared UFT with a combination therapy of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in patients who had undergone curative surgery for axillary lymph node-positive breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 377 node-positive patients with stage I, II, or IIIA disease were registered from September 1996 through July 2000 and were randomly assigned to either 6 cycles of CMF or 2 years of UFT. In both arms, tamoxifen (TAM) was concurrently administered for 2 years. The primary end point in this study was the non-inferiority of UFT to CMF. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference between the two groups was observed with regard to the 5-year RFS rate (72.2% in the UFT and 76.3% in the CMF). Adverse event profiles differed between the two groups, with a significantly lower incidence of leukopenia and anaemia in the UFT group, as well as anorexia, nausea/vomiting, stomatitis, and alopecia, which have implications for quality of life. CONCLUSION: UFT administered in combination with TAM holds promise in the treatment of lymph node-positive early breast cancer. On stratified analysis, the recurrence rate in the UFT group was found to be better in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive patients. Tegafur-based treatment should be evaluated by a prospective randomised trial conducted in ER-positive patients.
This multicenter phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of 4 months of neoadjuvant exemestane in 44 postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and/or progesterone receptor-positive, stage II to IIIB breast cancer measuring >or=3 cm. Pathological response was assessed by a central review board using response criteria proposed by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Clinical response [complete or partial response (PR)] was assessed by caliper, mammography, or ultrasound. Rates of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adverse events were also evaluated. A pathological response was observed in 13 (43%) of 30 patients who underwent surgery at 4 months. Fourteen patients were excluded from the pathological analysis: eight continued exemestane because of PR or stable disease (SD) at 4 months, three underwent chemotherapy because of progressive disease, and three underwent surgery within 2 months because of adverse events. A clinical response was seen in 27 (66%) of 41 evaluable patients. BCS was performed in 27 (90%) of 30 patients who underwent surgery at 4 months. Of the ten patients eligible for mastectomy at baseline, six chose to continue exemestane treatment without surgery because of a PR or SD at 4 months. Adverse events, most of which were grade 1, occurred in
Weekly paclitaxel as a 1 h infusion was active and generally well tolerated in previously treated patients. Further study of weekly paclitaxel in combination therapy is warranted.
A new method for allowing stool passage into the pelvic pouch before ileostomy closure to verify the defecation state and diminish stool frequency is reported herein. This was accomplished by fitting an ileostomy connector connecting the proximal and distal openings of the diverting loop stoma. The ileostomy connector was initially in place for 6 h a day, the length of time being gradually increased until it was able to be left in for 24 h a day over a 3-month period. The calculated daily frequency of stools decreased from 24 to 6 or 7 times, and the mean daily frequency immediately after ileostomy closure was 6.5 times. Physiological study also showed an improvement, with squeeze pressure increasing from 35 cmH2O to 116 cmH2O and the maximum tolerated volume increasing from 35 ml before, to 90 ml 3 months following the use of an ileostomy connector. Thus, we conclude that an ileostomy connector may be useful to predict postoperative functional outcome and its complications, and to diminish the frequency of defecation before ileostomy closure in patients with a covering loop stoma.
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.