Comparison of therapeutic effects between different cycles of docetaxel, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide regime on adjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer
10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2019.12.015
- Author:
Zhi-Wei WANG
1
Author Information
1. Department of Breast, The International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Adverse effect;
Breast cancer;
Chemotherapy;
Cyclophosphamide;
Docetaxel;
Epirubicin;
Therapeutic effect
- From:
Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University(Medical Science)
2019;39(12):1432-1436
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective • To compare the therapeutic effects and adverse effects between regimes TEC (docetaxel, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide)×8 and TEC×6 on the adjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer patients. Methods • Sixty-six locally advanced breast cancer patients with at least 4 positive lymph nodes were retrospectively selected in the International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from April 2008 to April 2015. Patients were divided into TEC×8 regime group (n=31) and TEC×6 regime group (n=35) according to the cycles that were given to the patients. Three-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year disease free survival (DFS) rate of patients in these two groups were compared. The incidence of myelosuppression, fever and liver function injury were also compared between patients in TEC×8 regime group and TEC×6 regime group. Chi square test (χ2) was used for comparison between two groups. Kaplan-Meier method was adopted to perform survival analysis. Results • No significant difference was found in 3-year OS rate between TEC×8 regime group (93.5%) and TEC×6 regime group (91.4%) (P=0.716), and no significant difference was found in 3-year DFS rate between TEC×8 regime group (87.1%) and TEC×6 regime group (85.7%) (P=0.855). The incidence of grade III/ myelosuppression of patients in TEC×8 regime group (90.3%) was significantly higher than that in TEC×6 regime group (65.7%) (P=0.017). No significant difference was found in the incidence of fever between TEC×8 '72egime group (16.1%) and TEC×6 regime group (14.3%) (P=0.835). There was no significant difference in the incidence of liver function injury between TEC×8 regime group (77.4%) and TEC×6 regime group (85.7%) (P=0.383). Conclusion • There is no significant difference in OS or DFS rate between TEC×8 regime and TEC×6 regime in adjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer, neither is in the incidence of fever and liver function injury. However, grade III / myelosuppression more frequently occurs in TEC×8 regime group.
