Mitoxantrone With or Without Docetaxel in Treating Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer
MITOXANTRONE (N) VS. 5-FLUOROURACIL, EPIRUBICIN AND CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE AS FIRST-LINE CHEMOTHERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC BREAST CANCER AND AN UNFAVORABLE PROGNOSIS
3 other identifiers
interventional
300
1 country
1
Brief Summary
RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die. It is not yet known if mitoxantrone is more effective with or without docetaxel. PURPOSE: Randomized phase III trial to compare the effectiveness of mitoxantrone with or without docetaxel in treating women who have metastatic breast cancer with a poor prognosis.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for phase_3 breast-cancer
Started May 1993
Typical duration for phase_3 breast-cancer
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
May 1, 1993
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 1, 1999
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
November 1, 2002
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 27, 2003
CompletedAugust 2, 2013
April 1, 2001
November 1, 1999
August 1, 2013
Conditions
Keywords
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
Contact the study team to discuss eligibility requirements. They can help determine if this study is right for you.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Diakonissen-Krankenhaus Stuttgart
Stuttgart, D-70176, Germany
Related Publications (4)
Heidemann E, Souchon R, Stoger H, et al.: First-line monochemotherapy with mitoxantrone versus combination with fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide in high-risk metastatic breast cancer: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial. Onkologie 23(1): 54-59, 2000.
BACKGROUNDHeidemann E, Stoeger H, Souchon R, et al.: Balance of time to progression, quality of life, and overall survival: more gain from treatment in single agent treatment with mitoxantrone (N) than with the combination of fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide (FEC). Results of a multicenter randomized trial in high risk metastatic breast cancer (MBC). [Abstract] Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology A-284, 74a, 2000.
BACKGROUNDLoibl S, von Minckwitz G, Souchon R, et al.: Phase I/II study with mitoxantrone (N) vs. NDOC in patients with high risk locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. [Abstract] Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 18: A512, 1999.
BACKGROUNDHeidemann E, Stoeger H, Souchon R, Hirschmann WD, Bodenstein H, Oberhoff C, Fischer JT, Schulze M, Clemens M, Andreesen R, Mahlke M, Konig M, Scharl A, Fehnle K, Kaufmann M. Is first-line single-agent mitoxantrone in the treatment of high-risk metastatic breast cancer patients as effective as combination chemotherapy? No difference in survival but higher quality of life were found in a multicenter randomized trial. Ann Oncol. 2002 Nov;13(11):1717-29. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdf306.
PMID: 12419743RESULT
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
Else G. Heidemann, MD
Diakonie-Klinikum Stuttgart
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 3
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 1, 1999
First Posted
January 27, 2003
Study Start
May 1, 1993
Study Completion
November 1, 2002
Last Updated
August 2, 2013
Record last verified: 2001-04