DOCSLIB.ORG

Acronyms for Oncology Regimens

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Acronyms for Oncology Regimens ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS OF COMMONLY USED REGIMENS ACRONYM CHEMOTHERAPY COMBINATION 7 + 3 Anthracycline (daunorubicin/idarubicin) or anthracenedione (mitoxantrone)/cytarabine ABV Doxorubicin/ bleomycin/vincristine ABVD Doxorubicin/ bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine AC Doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide ACE Doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/etoposide AI Doxorubicin/ifosfamide AIDA Tretinoin/idarubicin/dexamethasone/mitoxantrone/6-mercaptopurine/ methotrexate AP Doxorubicin/cisplatin AT Doxorubicin/docetaxel BEACOPP Bleomycin/etoposide/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/procarbazine/ prednisone BEP Bleomycin/etoposide/cisplatin BMC Bleomycin/methotrexate/carmustine CAD Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/dacarbazine CAP Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/cisplatin CAPIRI Capecitabine/irinotecan CAPOX Capecitabine/oxaliplatin CAV Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine CDE Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/etoposide CDE-R Cyclophsopahmide/doxorubicin/etoposide/rituximab CECA Cyclophosphamide/etoposide/carboplatin/cytarabine CFAR Alemtuzumab/fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab CHOEP Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/etoposide/prednisone CHOP Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone CHOP-R Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone/rtuximab ChlVPP Chlorambucil/vinblastine/procarbazine/prednisone CMF Cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-Fluorouracil CNOP Cyclophosphamide/mitoxantrone/vincristine/prednisone CODOX-M Cyclophsopahmide/vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/ leucovorin/intrathecal cytarabine/intrathecal methotrexate COP Cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prednisone CVM Cisplatin/vincristine/methotrexate/leucovorin CVP Cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prednisone CVP-R Cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prednisone/rituximab CYVADIC Cyclophosphamide/vincristine/doxorubicin/dacarbazine DCF Docetaxel/cisplatin/5-Fluorouracil DCEP Dexamethasone/cyclophosphamide/etoposide/cisplatin DEANGELIS Methotrexate/leucovorin/vincristine/procarbazine/dexamethasone/cytarabine/ radiation/ intrathecal methotrexate DHAP Dexamethasone/high dose cytarabine/cisplatin DTPACE Dexamethasone/thalidomide/cisplatin/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/etoposide DVD Liposomal doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone ECF Epirubicin/cisplatin/5-Fluorouracil ELF Epirubicin/leucovorin/5-Fluorouracil EMA-CO Dactinomycin/etoposide/methotrexate/leucovorin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine EMP Etoposide/mitoxantone/prednisone Last Updated on January 15, 2007 ACRONYM CHEMOTHERAPY COMBINATION EOX Epirubicin/oxaliplatin/capecitabine EP Etoposide/cisplatin EPOCH Etoposide/prednisone/vincristine/cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin ESHAP Etoposide/methylprednisolone/cytarabine/cisplatin EVAP Etoposide/vinblastine/doxorubicin/prednisone ESHAP Etoposide/methylprednisolone/cytarabine/cisplatin FAC 5-Fluorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide FAMTX 5-Fluorouracil/methotrexate/leucovorin/doxorubicin FAP 5-Fluorouracil/doxorubicin/cisplatin FC Fludaraabine/cyclophosphamide FCM-R Fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/mitoxantrone/rituximab FCR Fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab FEC 5-Fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide FLAG Fludarabine/cytarabine/G-CSF FLANG Fludarabine/high dose cytarabine/mitoxantrone/G-CSF FND Fludarabine/mitoxantrone/dexamethasone FOLFIRI Irinotecan/leucovorin/5-Fluorouracil FOLFOX Oxaliplatin/5-Fluorouracil/leucovorin FR Fludarabine/rituximab FUP 5-Fluorouracil/cisplatin GDP Gemcitabine/cisplatin/dexamethasone GEMCIS Gemcitabine/cisplatin GEMOX Gemictabine/oxaliplatin GTX Gemcitabine/docetaxel/capecitabine HDAC High Dose Cytarabine HIDAC High Dose Cytarabine HYPER CVAD Cyclophosphamide/mesna/doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone (Part I) HYPER CVAD Methotrexate/leucovorin/high dose cytarabine (Part II) IA Idarubicin/high dose cytarabine ICE Ifosfamide/carboplatin/etoposide IE Ifosfamide/etoposide IFL Irinotecan/leucovorin/5-Fluorouracil IVAC Ifosfamide/etoposide/mesna/cytarabine/leucovorin/intrathecal methotrexate LOPP Chlorambucil/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone MAC Methotrexate/dactinomycin/cyclophosphamide MAID Mesna/doxorubicin/ifosfamide/dacarbazine MAYO CLINIC Leucovorin/5-Fluorouracil MINE Mesna/ifosfamide/mitoxantrone/etoposide MINE-ESHAP Mesna/ifosfamide/mitoxantrone/etoposide- etoposide/methylprednisolone/high dose cytarabine/cisplatin MOPP Mechlorethamine/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone MOPP/ABV Mechlorethamine/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone/doxorubicin/bleomycin/ vinblastine MOPP-ABVD Mechlorethamine/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone/doxorubicin/bleomycin/ vinblastine/dacarbazine MP Melpahalan/prednisone MPT Melphalan/prednisone/thalidomide Last Updated on January 15, 2007 ACRONYM CHEMOTHERAPY COMBINATION MVAC Methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin PAC Cisplatin/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide PC Pentostatin/rituximab PCR Pentostatin/cyclophosphamide/rituximab PCV Procarbazine/lomustine/vincristine PIAF Cisplatin/5-Fluorouracil/interferon/doxorubicin PPF Paclitaxel/cisplatin/5-Fluorouracil RICE Rituximab/ifosfamide/carboplatin/etoposide ROSWELL PARK Leucovorin/5-Fluorouracil STANFORD V Mechlorethamine/doxorubicin/vinblastine/vincristine/bleomycin/etoposide/ prednisone TAC Docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide TAP Doxorubicin/cisplatin/paclitaxel TCH Docetaxel or paclitaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab ThaDD Thalidomide/dexamethasone/liposomal doxorubicin TIC Paclitaxel/ifosfamide/carboplatin TIP Paclitaxel/ifosfamide/cisplatin TPF Docetaxel/cisplatin/5-Fluorouracil TTR Paclitaxel/topotecan/rituximab VAC Vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/mesna VACPE Vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/prednisone/etoposide VAD Vincristine/doxorubicin/dexamethasone VBM Vinblastine/bleomycin/methotrexate VeIP Vinblastine/ifosfamide/cisplatin/mesna VIP Etoposide/ifosfamide/cisplatin XELGEM Capecitabine/gemcitabine XELIRI Capecitabine/irinotecan XELOX Capecitabine/oxaliplatin Last Updated on January 15, 2007 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gy Total Body Irradiation Followed by Allogeneic Hematopoietic St
    Bone Marrow Transplantation (2009) 44, 785–792 & 2009 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0268-3369/09 $32.00 www.nature.com/bmt ORIGINAL ARTICLE Fludarabine, amsacrine, high-dose cytarabine and 12 Gy total body irradiation followed by allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is effective in patients with relapsed or high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia F Zohren, A Czibere, I Bruns, R Fenk, T Schroeder, T Gra¨f, R Haas and G Kobbe Department of Haematology, Oncology and Clinical Immunology, Heinrich Heine-University, Du¨sseldorf, Germany In this prospective study, we examined the toxicity and Introduction efficacy of an intensified conditioning regimen for treatment of patients with relapsed or high-risk acute The use of intensified conventional induction chemothera- lymphoblastic leukemia who undergo allogeneic hemato- pies in the treatment of newly diagnosed ALL in adult poietic stem cell transplantation. Fifteen patients received patients has led to initial CR rates of up to 90%. But, as fludarabine 30 mg/m2, cytarabine 2000 mg/m2, amsacrine some patients are even refractory to first-line therapy, the 100 mg/m2 on days -10, -9, -8 and -7, anti-thymocyte majority of the responding patients unfortunately suffer globulin (ATG-Fresenius) 20 mg/kg body weight on days from relapse. Therefore, the probability of long-term -6, -5 and -4 and fractionated total body irradiation disease-free survival is o30%.1–5 Risk stratification based 2 Â 2 Gy on days -3, -2 and -1 (FLAMSA-ATG-TBI) on prognostic factors allows identification of high-risk before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. ALL patients with poor prognosis.6–12 Myeloablative At the time of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, 10 conditioning therapy followed by allogeneic hematopoietic patients were in complete remission (8 CR1; 2 CR2), 3 stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is currently the treatment with primary refractory and 2 suffered from refractory of choice for these high-risk patients.13–15 A combination of relapse.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyclophosphamide-Etoposide PO Ver
    Chemotherapy Protocol LYMPHOMA CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE-ETOPOSIDE ORAL Regimen Lymphoma – Cyclophosphamide-Etoposide PO Indication Palliative treatment of malignant lymphoma Toxicity Drug Adverse Effect Cyclophosphamide Dysuria, haemorrragic cystitis (rare), taste disturbances Etoposide Alopecia, hyperbilirubinaemia The adverse effects listed are not exhaustive. Please refer to the relevant Summary of Product Characteristics for full details. Patients diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Lymphoma carry a lifelong risk of transfusion associated graft versus host disease (TA-GVHD). Where blood products are required these patients must receive only irradiated blood products for life. Local blood transfusion departments must be notified as soon as a diagnosis is made and the patient must be issued with an alert card to carry with them at all times. Monitoring Drugs FBC, LFTs and U&Es prior to day one of treatment Albumin prior to each cycle Dose Modifications The dose modifications listed are for haematological, liver and renal function and drug specific toxicities only. Dose adjustments may be necessary for other toxicities as well. In principle all dose reductions due to adverse drug reactions should not be re-escalated in subsequent cycles without consultant approval. It is also a general rule for chemotherapy that if a third dose reduction is necessary treatment should be stopped. Please discuss all dose reductions / delays with the relevant consultant before prescribing, if appropriate. The approach may be different depending on the clinical circumstances. Version 1.1 (Jan 2015) Page 1 of 6 Lymphoma- Cyclophosphamide-Etoposide PO Haematological Dose modifications for haematological toxicity in the table below are for general guidance only. Always refer to the responsible consultant as any dose reductions or delays will be dependent on clinical circumstances and treatment intent.
    [Show full text]
  • ©Ferrata Storti Foundation
    Malignant Lymphomas Ifosfamide, epirubicin and etoposide (IEV) regimen as salvage and research paper mobilizing therapy for haematologica 2002; 87:816-821 relapsed/refractory lymphoma http://www.haematologica.ws/2002_08/816.htm patients PIER LUIGI ZINZANI, MONICA TANI, ANNA LIA MOLINARI,* VITTORIO STEFONI, ELIANA ZUFFA,* LAPO ALINARI, ANNALISA GABRIELE, FRANCESCA BONIFAZI, Institute of Hematology and Medical Oncology PATRIZIA ALBERTINI, MARZIA SALVUCCI,* SANTE TURA, “L. e A. Seràgnoli”, University of Bologna; MICHELE BACCARANI *Division of Hematology, Ravenna Hospital, Ravenna, Italy Background and Objectives. Therapy for relapsed/refrac- lthough advanced stage Hodgkin’s disease tory lymphomas should be based only on drugs not (HD) and some aggressive non-Hodgkin’s included in the front-line chemotherapy regimens. We Alymphomas (NHL) are potentially curable adopted the strategy of using salvage chemotherapy to with standard chemotherapy, many patients either debulk disease and simultaneously mobilize stem cells, relapse or never achieve remission.1,2 One way of using a regimen based on ifosfamide and etoposide, improving this situation could be to intensify (drugs not usually used for front-line treatment). front-line chemotherapy, either by dose-escala- tion of conventional therapy3 or by adding high- Design and Methods. A three-drug combination of ifos- famide, epirubicin and etoposide (IEV) was used to treat dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell 4,5 62 patients with relapsing or refractory aggressive non- (PBSC) rescue. Whereas treatment of relapsing Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL; n=51) or Hodgkin’s disease disease with conventional chemo- and/or radiation (HD; n=11). Forty-five of the patients were studied for the therapy is unsatisfactory, especially in those feasibility of peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) harvest.
    [Show full text]
  • VIP - Ifosfamide, Cisplatin and Etoposide
    THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Systemic Anti Cancer Treatment Protocol VIP - Ifosfamide, Cisplatin and Etoposide PROTOCOL REF: MPHA VIPGC (Version No: 1.1) Approved for use in: Germ cell Dosage: Drug Dosage Route Frequency Etoposide 75mg/m2 days 1 to 5 IV Every 21 days Cisplatin 20mg/m2 days 1 to 5 IV Every 21 days Mesna 200mg/m2 days 1 to 5 IV Every 21 days Ifosfamide 1500mg/m2 + 1500mg/m2 IV Every 21 days +Mesna days 1 to 5 Mesna 1200mg 1 to 5 Oral Every 21 days Supportive treatments: Domperidone 10mg oral tablets, up to 3 times a day or as required Dexamethasone tablets, 4mg twice daily for 3 days Filgrastim 30MU or 48MU subcutaneous injection daily for 7 days starting on day 6, repeat FBC and continue for further 7 days if neutrophil count has not recovered to 1.0 x 109/L Extravasation risk: Etoposide – Irritant Cisplatin – Exfoliant Ifosfamide - Neutral Issue Date: 31st January 2019 Review Date: January 2022 Page 1 of 10 Protocol reference: MPHAVIPGC Author: Nick Armitage Authorised by: Dr. Ali Version No:1.1 THE CLATTERBRIDGE CANCER CENTRE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST Administration: Day Drug Dosage Route Diluent and Rate 1 Dexamethasone 8mg PO 30 mins before chemotherapy 1 Ondansetron 16mg PO 30 mins before chemotherapy 1 Etoposide 75mg/m2 IV In 250 to 1000mL sodium chloride 0.9% over 60 minutes 1 Cisplatin 20mg/m2 IV 1000mL 0.9% sodium chloride over 90 minutes 1 Mesna 200mg/m2 IV In 500mL sodium chloride 0.9% over 15 minutes 1 Ifosfamide + Mesna 1500mg/m2 IV In 1000mL sodium chloride + 0.9% over 4 hours 1500mg/m2
    [Show full text]
  • Fludarabine Phosphate Powder for Solution for Injection Or Infusion
    For the use only of a Registered Medical Practitioner or a Hospital or a Laboratory This package insert is continually updated. Please read carefully before using a new pack. Fludarabine Phosphate Powder for Solution for Injection or Infusion FLUDARA® NAME OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCT Fludara 50 mg powder for solution for injection/infusion COMPOSITION Active ingredient: Each vial contains 50 mg fludarabine phosphate I.P. 1 ml of reconstituted solution for injection/infusion contains 25 mg fludarabine phosphate. Excipients: Mannitol, Sodium hydroxide (to adjust the pH to 7.7). INDICATIONS Fludara is indicated for the treatment of patients with B -cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have not responded to at least one standard alkylating-agent containing regimen. DOSAGE AND METHOD OF ADMINISTRATION Method of administration Fludara must be administered only intravenously. No cases have been reported in which paravenously administered Fludara led to severe local adverse reactions. However, unintentional paravenous administration must be avoided. Dosage regimen Adults Fludara solution for injection/infusion should be administered under the supervision of a qualified physician experienced in the use of antineoplastic therapy. The recommended dose is 25 mg fludarabine phosphate/m² body surface given daily for 5 consecutive days every 28 days by the intravenous route. Each vial is to be made up in 2 ml water for injection. Each ml of the resulting solution for injection/infusion will contain 25 mg fludarabine phosphate (see section ‘Instructions for use/handling’). The required dose (calculated on the basis of the patient's body surface) is drawn up into a syringe. For intravenous bolus injection, this dose is further diluted into 10 ml of 0.9 % sodium chloride.
    [Show full text]
  • SYN-40585 SYNRIBO Digital PI, Pil and IFU 5/2021 V3.Indd
    SYN-40585 CONTRAINDICATIONS HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION None. These highlights do not include all the information needed to use SYNRIBO safely and WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS effectively. See full prescribing information for SYNRIBO. • Myelosuppression: Severe and fatal thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anemia. Monitor SYNRIBO® (omacetaxine mepesuccinate) for injection, for subcutaneous use hematologic parameters frequently (2.3, 5.1). Initial U.S. Approval: 2012 • Bleeding: Severe thrombocytopenia and increased risk of hemorrhage. Fatal cerebral hemorrhage and severe, non-fatal gastrointestinal hemorrhage (5.1, 5.2). INDICATIONS AND USAGE Hyperglycemia: Glucose intolerance and hyperglycemia including hyperosmolar non-ketotic SYNRIBO for Injection is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with chronic or accelerated • hyperglycemia (5.3). phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) with resistance and/or intolerance to two or more Embryo-Fetal Toxicity: Can cause fetal harm. Advise females of reproductive potential of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) (1). • potential risk to a fetus and to use an effective method of contraception (5.4, 8.1, 8.3). DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION ADVERSE REACTIONS Induction Dose: 1.25 mg/m2 administered by subcutaneous injection twice daily for • Most common adverse reactions (frequency ≥ 20%): thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, 14 consecutive days of a 28-day cycle (2.1). diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, asthenia, injection site reaction, pyrexia, infection, and lymphopenia Maintenance Dose: 1.25 mg/m2 administered by subcutaneous injection twice daily for • (6.1). 7 consecutive days of a 28-day cycle (2.2). • Dose modifications are needed for toxicity (2.3). To report SUSPECTED ADVERSE REACTIONS, contact Teva Pharmaceuticals at 1-888-483-8279 or FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch.
    [Show full text]
  • PEMD-91-12BR Off-Label Drugs: Initial Results of a National Survey
    11 1; -- __...._-----. ^.-- ______ -..._._ _.__ - _........ - t Ji Jo United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20648 Program Evaluation and Methodology Division B-242851 February 25,199l The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy Chairman, Committee on Labor and Human Resources United States Senate Dear Mr. Chairman: In September 1989, you asked us to conduct a study on reimbursement denials by health insurers for off-label drug use. As you know, the Food and Drug Administration designates the specific clinical indications for which a drug has been proven effective on a label insert for each approved drug, “Off-label” drug use occurs when physicians prescribe a drug for clinical indications other than those listed on the label. In response to your request, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of oncologists to determine: . the prevalence of off-label use of anticancer drugs by oncologists and how use varies by clinical, demographic, and geographic factors; l the extent to which third-party payers (for example, Medicare intermediaries, private health insurers) are denying payment for such use; and l whether the policies of third-party payers are influencing the treatment of cancer patients. We randomly selected 1,470 members of the American Society of Clinical Oncologists and sent them our survey in March 1990. The sam- pling was structured to ensure that our results would be generalizable both to the nation and to the 11 states with the largest number of oncologists. Our response rate was 56 percent, and a comparison of respondents to nonrespondents shows no noteworthy differences between the two groups.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phase II Study of Paclitaxel and Capecitabine As a First-Line Combination Chemotherapy for Advanced Gastric Cancer
    British Journal of Cancer (2008) 98, 316 – 322 & 2008 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved 0007 – 0920/08 $30.00 www.bjcancer.com A phase II study of paclitaxel and capecitabine as a first-line combination chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer Clinical Studies HJ Kang1, HM Chang1, TW Kim1, M-H Ryu1, H-J Sohn1, JH Yook2,STOh2, BS Kim2, J-S Lee1 and Y-K Kang*,1 1 2 Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea; Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea Paclitaxel and capecitabine, which have distinct mechanisms of action and toxicity profiles, have each shown high activity as single agents in gastric cancer. Synergistic interaction between these two drugs was suggested by taxane-induced upregulation of thymidine phosphorylase. We, therefore, evaluated the antitumour activity and toxicities of paclitaxel and capecitabine as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Patients with histologically confirmed unresectable or metastatic AGC were treated À2 À2 with capecitabine 825 mg m p.o. twice daily on days 1–14 and paclitaxel 175 mg m i.v. on day 1 every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities. Between June 2002 and May 2004, 45 patients, of median age 57 years (range ¼ 38–73 years), were treated with the combination of capecitabine and paclitaxel. After a median 6 cycles (range ¼ 1–9 cycles) of chemotherapy, 43 were evaluable for toxicity and response. A total of 2 patients showed complete response and 20 showed partial response making the overall response rate 48.9% (95% CI ¼ 30.3–63.5%).
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Outcome of FLAG-IDA Chemotherapy Sequential
    Bone Marrow Transplantation (2019) 54:458–464 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-018-0283-5 ARTICLE Clinical outcome of FLAG-IDA chemotherapy sequential with Flu–Bu3 conditioning regimen in patients with refractory AML: a parallel study from Shanghai Institute of Hematology and Institut Paoli-Calmettes 1 2 3 2 3 2 1 Ling Wang ● Raynier Devillier ● Ming Wan ● Justine Decroocq ● Liang Tian ● Sabine Fürst ● Li-Ning Wang ● 2 1 2 1 Norbert Vey ● Xing Fan ● Didier Blaise ● Jiong Hu Received: 23 January 2018 / Revised: 28 June 2018 / Accepted: 30 June 2018 / Published online: 6 August 2018 © The Author(s) 2018. This article is published with open access Abstract The purpose of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of conditioning regimen with sequential chemotherapy (FLAG-IDA), followed by Fludarabine (5 days) + Busulfan (3 days) by parallel analysis of patients with refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) from two transplantation centers in China and France. A total of 47 refractory AML with median bone marrow blast of 35% (1–90%) and median age at 42 years (16–62) were enrolled. Thirteen patients received peripheral stem cell 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: transplantation (HSCT) from HLA-matched sibling donor, while 18 and 16 from unrelated or haplo-identical donors, respectively. With a median follow-up of 24.3 months (1–70), 13 patients relapsed at a median time of 5.1 months (2.2–18.0) and 24 patients died due to relapse (n = 12) or non-relapsed mortality (NRM, n = 12). The estimated 3-year RR and NRM were 33.5 ± 5.7% and 25.7 ± 4.2%, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Fludarabine Phosphate (NSC 312878) Infusions for the Treatment of Acute Leukemia: Phase I and Neuropathological Study1
    [CANCER RESEARCH 46, 5953-5958, November 1986] Fludarabine Phosphate (NSC 312878) Infusions for the Treatment of Acute Leukemia: Phase I and Neuropathological Study1 David R. Spriggs,2 Edward Stopa, Robert J. Mayer, William Schoene, and Donald W. Kufe3 Dana Farber Cancer Institute [D. R. S., R. J. M.. D. W. K.J and Department ofPathology, Brigham and Women 's Hospital [E. S., W. SJ, Boston, Massachusetts 0211S ABSTRACT a relationship between dose and lethargy. The schedule of drug administration in these studies was not a 5-day infusion. A Fludarabine phosphate (NSC 312878), an adenosine deaminase resist ant analogue of 9-/9-D-arabinofuranosyladenine, has entered clinical trials. single bolus was used in one study while the other used a single bolus followed by a 48-h infusion. Eleven patients with acute leukemia in relapse received 14 courses of fludarabine phosphate as a 5-day continuous infusion administered at Based on the myelosuppressive effects of fludarabine phos doses of 40 to 100 mg/m2/day. Toxicity was characterized by uniform phate in Phase I testing, we instituted a Phase I and II trial to myelosuppression, as well as occasional nausea, vomiting, and hepato- identify the toxicity and efficacy of fludarabine phosphate in toxicity. Three episodes of metabolic acidosis and lactic acidemia were the treatment of acute leukemia. The drug was administered as noted. In addition, three patients suffered neurotoxicity. Two of these a 5-day continuous infusion at a starting dose equivalent to the three patients had a severe neurotoxicity syndrome characterized by maximum tolerated dose reached in patients with solid tumors.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phase II Study of Capecitabine and Docetaxel Combination Chemotherapy in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer
    British Journal of Cancer (2004) 90, 1329 – 1333 & 2004 Cancer Research UK All rights reserved 0007 – 0920/04 $25.00 www.bjcancer.com A phase II study of capecitabine and docetaxel combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer YH Park*,1, B-Y Ryoo1, S-J Choi1and H-T Kim1 1 Division of Haematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Science, Seoul, Korea Clinical Capecitabine and docetaxel have considerable single-agent activity in gastric cancer with distinct mechanisms of action and no overlap of key toxicities. A synergistic interaction between these two drugs is mediated by taxane-induced upregulation of thymidine phosphorylase. We investigated the activity and the feasibility of capecitabine and docetaxel combination chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (AGC). From September 2001 to March 2003, 42 patients with AGC received À2 À2 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine (1250 mg m twice daily on days 1–14) and docetaxel (75 mg m i.v. on day 1). The patients received a total of 164 cycles of chemotherapy. The median age was 53.5 years (range 33–73 years). The overall response rate in the 38 efficacy-evaluable patients was 60% (95% confidence interval, 45–74%). The median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (range, 1.0–15.5 þ months) and the median overall survival was 10.5 months (range, 2.9–23.7 þ months). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were hand–foot syndrome (HFS: G3 50%), neutropenia (15%) and leucopenia (12%). Further studies of this combination are clearly warranted, albeit with lower doses of both agents (1000 mg mÀ2 twice daily and 60 mg mÀ2) to reduce the rate of HFS and onycholysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Overall Survival, Quality of Life, And
    Supplementary Online Content Salas-Vega S, Iliopoulos O, Mossialos E. Assesment of overall survival, quality of life, and safety benefits associated with new cancer medicines [published online December 29, 2016]. JAMA Oncol. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4166 eTable 1. Therapeutic profile of all cancer medicines approved by the FDA between 2003- 2013 eTable 2. Regulatory evidence in support of classification of drug clinical benefits eFigure 1. Number of cancer drugs that were evaluated by all three HTA agencies, sorted by magnitude of clinical benefits eTable 3. Interagency agreement–Krippendorff’s alpha coefficients eMethods This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. Online-Only Supplement © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/25/2021 Clinical value of cancer medicines Contents eExhibits ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 eTable 1. Therapeutic profile of all cancer medicines approved by the FDA between 2003- 2013 (Summary of eTable 2) ................................................................................................................... 3 eTable 2. Regulatory evidence in support of classification of drug clinical benefits ....................... 6 eFigure 1. Number of cancer drugs that were evaluated by all three HTA agencies, sorted by magnitude of clinical benefits
    [Show full text]