| Abemaciclib +nsAI versus nsAI | |||
| MONARCH 3, 2017 NCT02246621 | Abemaciclib (LY2835219) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (nSAI) versus Placebo + NSAI | Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Locoregionally Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer With No Prior Systemic Therapy in This Disease Setting | double-blind |
| adrenal versus A/FCP | |||
| Rosner, 1974 | versus | ||
| adrenal/oophorectomy versus FAC | |||
| Tashiro, 1990 | versus | ||
| alternating versus successive | |||
| Mauriac, 1986 | versus | ||
| aminoglutethimide versus hydrocortisone | |||
| Mercer, 1993 | versus | second-line hormone treatment of advanced breast cancer | |
| aminoglutethimide versus medroxyprogesterone acetate | |||
| Canney, 1988 | aminoglutethimide versus high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) | postmenopausal patients with advanced breast carcinoma | |
| Garcia-Giralt, 1992 | versus | and third line hormonotherapy in advanced post-menopausal breast cancerpatients who have become resistant to tamoxifen | |
| Samonis, 1994 | versus | women with metastatic breast cancer | |
| aminoglutethimide versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Lundgren, 1989 | aminoglutethimide versus | second-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer | |
| Russell, 1997 | versus | second-line endocrine therapy of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: | |
| aminoglutethimide versus tamoxifen | |||
| Alonso-Munoz, 1988 | versus | advanced postmenopausal breast cancer | |
| Gale, 1994 | versus | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer | |
| aminoglutethimide + tamoxifen versus tamoxifen | |||
| Ingle, 1986 | tamoxifen alone versus TAM plus aminoglutethimide (AG) and hydrocortisone (HC). | ||
| Rose, 1986 | versus | postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer | |
| anastrozole versus fulvestrant | |||
| Mauriac, 2003 | versus | ||
| anastrozole versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Buzdar a, 1996 | versus | postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer | |
| anastrozole versus tamoxifen | |||
| TARGET (Bonneterre), 2001 | anastrozole
1 mg once daily versus tamoxifen 20 mg once daily | first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in 353 postmenopausal women | |
| Milla-Santos, 2003 | versus | -line therapy in postmenopausal, hormone-dependent, advanced breast cancer | |
| androgen versus 5-fluorouracil | |||
| Goldenberg, 1975 | versus | ||
| atezolizumab + Nab-Paclitaxel versus Nab-Paclitaxel | |||
| IMpassion130, 2018 | versus | patients with untreated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer | |
| bevacizumab + capecitabine versus capecitabine | |||
| AVF2119g (Miller) cape, 2005 | capecitabine + bevacizumab 15 mg/kg iv every 3 weeks versus capecitabine (2,500 mg/m2/d) twice daily on day 1 through 14 every 3 weeks | patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane | open US |
| RIBBON-I (Robert) on top capecitabine, 2009 | Capecitabine + bevacizumab 15 mg/kg iv every 3 weeks versus capecitabine (Cape; 2,000 mg/m(2) for 14 days), | irst-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| bevacizumab + docetaxel versus docetaxel | |||
| AVADO (Miles) 7.5mg, 2010 | bevacizumab 7.5mg/kg every 3 weeks plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel | first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| AVADO (Miles) 15mg , 2009 | Docetaxel + bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg iv every 3 weeks versus | first-line treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer | |
| bevacizumab + endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy | |||
| LEA, | bevacizumab + letrozole/fulvestrant versus letrozole or fulvestrant | first-line therapy in postmenopausal patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative and hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer | |
| bevacizumab + methotrexate versus methotrexate | |||
| Burstein, 2005 | Methotrexate + cyclophosphamide + bevacizumab 10 mg/kg iv every 2 weeks versus | ||
| bevacizumab + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel | |||
| Martin bevacizumab, 2011 | bevacizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle versus control | patients with HER2-negative locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer | open design |
| bevacizumab + taxanes versus taxanes | |||
| E2100 (Miller), 2007 NCT00028990 | paclitaxel + bevacizumab 10 mg/kg iv every 2 weeks versus paclitaxel 90 mg per square meter of body-surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks | patients with metastatic breast cancer not previously treated | open |
| RIBBON-I (Robert) on top Tax or anthra, 2009 | Taxanes or anthracyclines + bevacizumab 15 mg/kg iv every 3 weeks versus taxane (Tax) -based (nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2), docetaxel 75 or 100 mg/m(2)), or anthracycline (Anthra) -based (doxorubicin or epirubicin combinations [doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, o | irst-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer | |
| bevacizumav + CT versus CT alone | |||
| RIBBON-2 (Brufsky), 2009 | addition of BV to chemotherapies used as second-line treatment for MBC versus chemo+placebo | second-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer | open 19 countries |
| CAF versus CMFVP | |||
| Smalley, 1983 | cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, vincristine, and prednisone (CMFVP) | ||
| CAF alone versus MPA alone | |||
| Abe, 1995 | cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) versus | ||
| CAP versus CFP | |||
| Creagan ET, 1984 | four cycles of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin (Adria Laboratories, Inc, Columbus, Ohio), cisplatin (CAP) followed by maintenance with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone (CFP) versus | ||
| CAP versus CMFVP | |||
| Kolaric, 1985 | versus | ||
| CAP versus FAC | |||
| Kolaric, 1989 | versus | ||
| capecitabine versus CMF | |||
| Oshaughnessy, 2001 | intermittent oral capecitabine 1,255 mg/m2 twice daily (two weeks' treatment followed by a one-week rest period) versus intravenous CMF (cyclophosphamide. methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]) administered every three weeks | -line therapy for advanced/metastatic breast cancer | |
| capecitabine versus control | |||
| Joensuu, 2009 NCT00114816 | three cycles of capecitabine and docetaxel followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and capecitabine versus three cycles of docetaxel followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil | women with axillary node-positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer | open-label |
| capecitabine versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil | |||
| Stockler, 2011 | versus | ||
| capecitabine versus docetaxel + epirubicin | |||
| Mavroudis, 2010 | docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus capecitabine 950 mg/m(2) orally twice daily on days 1-14 (DC) in 21-day cycles versus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) plus epirubicin 75 mg/m(2) (DE) on day 1 | women with advanced breast cancer | |
| capecitabine versus paclitaxel | |||
| Talbot, 2002 | intermittent oral capecitabine (1255 mg m(-2) twice daily, days 1-14, (22 patients)) versus i.v. paclitaxel (175 mg m(-2), | patients with metastatic/advanced breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines | |
| Moiseenko, 2000 | versus | ||
| capecitabine versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin | |||
| Jäger, 2010 | versus | ||
| capecitabine versus vinorelbine | |||
| EORTC 10001 (Pajk), 2008 | capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) orally bid days 1-14 versus vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1 and 8, both given every 3 weeks | patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer | |
| capecitabine docetaxel versus docetaxel | |||
| GeparQuattro, 2010 NCT00288002 | versus | Patients with large operable or locally advanced tumors, with hormone receptor-negative tumors, or with receptor-positive tumors but also clinically node-positive disease | |
| capecitabine MPA versus IV CT | |||
| Hori, 0 | capecitabine, + medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) + cyclophosphamide versus 5-fluorouracil + adriamycin + CPA) plus MPA | metastatic breast cancer | |
| capecitabine + docetaxel versus docetaxel alone | |||
| Verma, 2005 | 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily, on Days 1-14, plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Day 1 versus docetaxel 100 mg/m2 on Day 1 | patients with anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast carcinoma | |
| Miles, 2004 | versus | patients with anthracycline-pretreated advanced/metastatic breast cancer | |
| O'Shaughnessy, 2002 | 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 versus docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 | patients with advanced breast cancer | |
| capecitabine + docetaxel versus doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide | |||
| Lee, 2008 | versus | women with axillary node positive, stage II/III breast cancer | |
| carboplatin followed by CAF versus CAF | |||
| Costanza, 1999 | carboplatin followed by CAF versus immediate chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) | women with measurable metastatic breast cancer, previously untreated with chemotherapy for their metastatic disease | |
| cediranib + fulvestrant versus fulvestrant | |||
| Hyams, NCT00454805 | versus | ||
| cisplatin + epirubicin versus lonidamine + epirubicin | |||
| Berruti A, 2002 | cisplatin + epirubicin versus lonidamine + epirubicin | ||
| Berruti B, 2002 | versus | ||
| cisplatin + etoposide versus CMF | |||
| Cocconi, 1991 | cisplatin (P) and etoposide (E) versus standard cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) | ||
| CMF + tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone | |||
| Bezwoda, 1982 | cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) versus | ||
| CMF, cisplatin, etoposide, and doxorubicin versus CMF | |||
| Cocconi, 1999 | The same single agents (C, M, F, cisplatin, etoposide, and doxorubicin) were administered in both experimental arms, but following a different policy. versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil | ||
| CNF versus CAF | |||
| Stewart, 1997 | CNF intravenous cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 + mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2 every 3 weeks versus CAF intravenous cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 + doxorubicin (Adriamycin) 50 mg/m2 every 3 weeks | advanced breast cancer | open |
| combination versus sequential | |||
| ANZBCTG, 1986 | versus | ||
| combination of hormone therapies versus tamoxifen | |||
| Powles, 1984 | combination of hormone therapies using tamoxifen, aminoglutethimide with hydrocortisone, and danazol (TAD) versus tamoxifen | ||
| continuous versus intermittent | |||
| Coates, 1987 | continuous chemotherapy, administered until disease progression was evident versus intermittent therapy, whereby treatment was stopped after three cycles and then repeated for three more cycles only when there was evidence of disease progression | ||
| Continuous AC or CMF versus Intermittent AC or CMF | |||
| Coates, | versus | ||
| Continuous chemotherapy versus Intermittent chemotherapy | |||
| Harris, | versus | ||
| CT + endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy alone | |||
| Kiang, 1985 | estrogen therapy combined with chemotherapy versus estrogen therapy alone | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, whose tumors were rich in estrogen receptors or of unknown estrogen-receptor status | |
| CT + oophorectomy versus oophorectomy | |||
| Ahmann, 1982 | 5-flourouracil, cytoxan and prednisone versus | premenopausal patients with recurrent or advanced breast cancer | |
| Rossof, 1982 | cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) combination versus observation alone | Premenopausal patients with progressive measurable metastatic breast cancer who demonstrated either stable or responsive disease 12 weeks following oophorectomy | |
| docetaxel versus doxorubicin | |||
| 303 Study Group, 1999 | intravenous infusion of docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for a maximum of seven treatment cycles. versus intravenous infusion of doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for a maximum of seven treatment cycles. | patients with metastatic breast cancer who had received previous alkylating agent-containing chemotherapy | |
| docetaxel versus doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide | |||
| JCOG, 2005 | versus | first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer | |
| docetaxel versus fluorouracil, vinorelbine | |||
| TXT Group, 2002 | docetaxel (100 mg m(-2)) every 3 weeks versus 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine: 5-fluorouracil (750 mg m(-2) per day continuous infusion) D1-5 plus vinorelbine (25 mg m(-2)) D1 and D5 of each 3-week cycle | patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure of neo/adjuvant or one line of palliative anthracycline-based chemotherapy | |
| docetaxel versus mitomycin, vinblastine | |||
| 304 Study Group, 1999 | docetaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks versus mitomycin 12 mg/m2 i.v. every 6 weeks plus vinblastine 6 mg/m2 i.v. every 3 weeks | patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy | open-label |
| docetaxel versus sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil | |||
| Sjostrom, 1999 | Docetaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks versus sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil | patients with advanced breast cancer who had failed previous anthracycline treatment | |
| docetaxel versus vinorelbine | |||
| Meier, 2008 | weekly docetaxel (DOC), 6 weekly doses per 8-week cycle versus Weekly vinorelbine | after failing anthracycline treatment | |
| docetaxel + doxorubicin versus doxorobicin + cyclophosphamide | |||
| 306 Study Group, 2003 | doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) versus doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) | first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer | |
| docetaxel + doxorubicin versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| Bontenbal, 2005 | AT (doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 75 mg/m2) versus FAC (fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2); | first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: | |
| docetaxel + epirubicin versus epirubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| Blohmer, 2010 | ED (epirubicin 75 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2)) versus EC (epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)). | first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer | |
| docetaxel + epirubicin versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| Bonneterre, 2004 | docetaxel 75 mg m(-2) plus epirubicin 75 mg m(-2) versus 5-fluorouracil 500 mg m(-2) plus epirubicin 75 mg m(-2) and cyclophosphamide 500 mg m(-2) intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles | ||
| docetaxel + trastuzumab versus vinorelbine, trastuzumab | |||
| HERNATA, 2011 | docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) day 1 versus vinorelbine 30 to 35 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 | first-line therapy of metastatic or locally advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer | |
| EcisF versus ECycloF | |||
| Eisen, 1998 | versus | ||
| endocrine therapy versus CT | |||
| Priestman, 1978 | endocrine treatment versus cytotoxic treatment | ||
| Entinostat + exemestane versus exemestane | |||
| ENCORE 301, 2013 NCT00676663 | entinostat 5 mg once per week + exemestane 25 mg daily versus exemestane plus placebo | Postmenopausal women with ER+ advanced breast cancer progressing on a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor | |
| enzastaurin + fulvestrant versus Fulvestrant | |||
| De Jong, | versus | ||
| EPI + CIS versus EPI | |||
| Nielsen, 2000 | versus | ||
| eribulin versus capecitabine | |||
| Trial 301 (Kaufman), 2015 NCT00337103 | eribulin
mesylate 1.4 mg/m2 (equivalent to eribulin 1.23 mg/m2 [expressed as free
base]) intravenously over 2 to 5 minutes on days 1 and 8
until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or
patient/investigator request to discontinue versus capecitabine 1.25 g/m2 orally twice per day on days 1 to 14, both in 21-day cycles | patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane | open-label |
| eribulin versus ixabepilone | |||
| Vahdat, 2013 NCT00879086 | eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m2, 2–5 min
intravenous on days 1 and 8) versus ixabepilone (40 mg/m2, 3 h intravenous on day 1) on a 21-day cycle | patients with metastatic breast cancer | open-label |
| eribulin versus treatment of physician | |||
| EMBRACE (Cortes), 2011 NCT00388726 | eribulin mesilate (1·4 mg/m² administered intravenously during 2–5 min on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day
cycle) versus treatment of physician’s choice | patients with metastatic breast cancer who had received between two and fi ve previous chemotherapy regimens (two or more for advanced disease), including an anthracycline and a taxane, unless contraindicated. | open-label 19 countries |
| everolimus + exemestane versus exemestane alone | |||
| BOLERO-2, 2011 NCT00863655 | everolimus and exemestane versus exemestane and placebo | patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who had recurrence or progression while receiving previous therapy with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting or to treat advanced disease (or both). | double-blind |
| everolimus + tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone | |||
| TAMRAD , 2012 NCT01298713 | tamoxifen 20 mg/d plus everolimus 10 mg/d versus tamoxifen 20 mg/d alone | postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, AI-resistant mBC | open-label |
| everolimus + trastuzumab + vinorelbine versus trastuzumab + vinorelbine alone | |||
| BOLERO-3, 2014 NCT01007942 | daily everolimus (5 mg/day) plus weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) in 3-week cycles versus placebo plus trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, | women with HER2-positive, trastuzumab-resistant, advanced breast carcinoma who had previously received taxane therapy | double-blind |
| exemestane versus fulvestrant | |||
| Chia, 2008 | versus | ||
| exemestane versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Kaufmann, 2000 | versus | postmenopausal women with progressive advanced breast cancer who experienced failure of tamoxifen | |
| exemestane versus tamoxifen | |||
| Paridaens, 2003 | exemestane versus tamoxifen | first-line hormone therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer | |
| FAC versus FEC | |||
| French Epirubicin Study , 1988 | fluorouracil, 500 mg/m2; cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m2; and either epirubicin versus doxorubicin | ||
| Italian Study, 1988 | fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide | ||
| fadrozole versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Bezwoda, 1998 | versus | ||
| Buzdar b, 1996 | versus | postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast carcinoma: | |
| Buzdar c, 1996 | versus | postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast carcinoma | |
| fadrozole versus tamoxifen | |||
| Falkson, 1996 | versus | previously untreated postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer | |
| Thuerlimann, 1996 | versus | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer | |
| FEC x 24 + tamoxifen versus FEC x 8 + tamoxifen | |||
| Ejlertsen, | cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil (CEF) once every 3 weeks for a maximum of 18 months versus identical chemotherapy for a maximum of 6 months | ||
| fluvestrant 250mg versus exemestane | |||
| 9238UK/0005 (fluvestrant alone), 0 NCT00944918 | fulvestrant Intramuscular injection on days 1, 15, and 29 and then once monthly until disease progression
versus exemestane oral, once daily until disease progression. | postmenopausal locally advanced / metastatic breast cancer patients who have progressed on NSAIs | double-blind Korea |
| SoFEa (Johnston) fluvestrant alone, 2012 NCT00253422 | fulvestrant intramuscularly (IM) on days 1, 15, and 29 and then once monthly versus exemestane once daily | Postmenopausal Women With ER+ve Locally Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer Following Progression on Non-Steroidal Aromatase Inhibitors | UK |
| formestane versus anastrozole | |||
| Kleeberg, 1997 | versus | women with advanced breast cancer | |
| formestane versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Freue, 2000 | versus | postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer previously treated with tamoxifen | |
| Thuerlimann, 1997 | versus | ||
| formestane versus tamoxifen | |||
| Perez Carrion, 1994 | versus | ||
| fulvestrant + anastrozole versus anastrozole | |||
| GEICAM/2006-10, 3000 NCT00543127 | 500 mg Im Fulvestrant day 0, 250 mg days 14 and 28(charge dose); later 250 mg each 28 days during 3 years plus 1 mg oral anastrozol per day during 5 years versus Anastrozol 1 mg daily for 5 yeras | Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive and negative Her2 tumours | open label spain |
| FACT (Bergh), 2012 NCT00256698 | fulvestrant 500 mg intramuscular on
day 1 and 250mgon days 15 and 29 and thereafter every fourth week3 days,
until proven progression or undue toxicity, in combination with anastrozole
1 mg orally per day versus anastrozole orally at 1 mg per day until proven progression or undue toxicity | first-line therapy for patients with receptor-positive postmenopausal breast cancer | opan-label canada |
| Mehta(SWOG-S0226), 2012 NCT00075764 | Fulvestrant
was administered intramuscularly at a dose of 500 mg on day 1 and 250 mg
on days 14 and 28 and monthly thereafter. versus 1 mg of anastrozole orally every day (group 1), with crossover to fulvestrant alone strongly encouraged if the disease progressed, | Postmenopausal women with previously untreated with hormone-receptor (HR)-positive | |
| fulvestrant + anastrozole versus exemestane | |||
| 9238UK/0005 (combination), 0 NCT00944918 | versus | postmenopausal locally advanced / metastatic breast cancer patients who have progressed on NSAIs | double-blind Korea |
| SoFEa (Johnston) combination, 2012 NCT00253422 | Fulvestrant With Concomitant Anastrozole versus Exemestane | Postmenopausal Women With ER+ve Locally Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer Following Progression on Non-Steroidal Aromatase Inhibitors | |
| fulvestrant 250mg versus anastrozole | |||
| Xu et al., 2011 NCT00327769 | fulvestrant 250 mg/month versus 1 mg/day anastrozole | receptor positive postmenopausal advanced breast cancer. | double-blind china |
| 0021 (Osborne), 2002 NCT00635713 | intramuscular injection of fulvestrant 250 mg once monthly versus daily oral dose of anastrozole 1 mg | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer | double-blind |
| 0020 (Howell), 2002 | fulvestrant 250 mg as a once-monthly (one x 5 mL) intramuscular injection versus oral dose of anastrozole 1 mg | open-label | |
| fulvestrant 250mg versus exemestane | |||
| EFECT (Chia), 0 NCT00065325 | Fulvestrant 500 mg (2 x 5 mL, im injections) administered as a loading dose on Day 0,
followed by 250 mg (1 x 5 mL) on Day 14, Day 28 and monthly (ie, 28 ± 3 days) thereafter. versus Exemestane 25 mg administered once daily by mouth (po) from Day 0. | hormone receptor positive postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer | double-blind |
| fulvestrant 250mg versus tamoxifen | |||
| 9238IL/0025, 0 NCT00241449 | intramuscular injection 250 mg versus | first-line treatment for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. | double-blind USA |
| 0025 (Howell), 2004 | fulvestrant 250 mg, via intramuscular injection, once monthly; versus tamoxifen 20 mg, orally, once daily | advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women previously untreated with endocrine therapy | double-blind |
| fulvestrant 500mg versus anastrozole | |||
| FIRST (Robertson), 2010 NCT00274469 | 500 mg intramuscular injection versus anastrozole 1 mg oral tablet | First Line Hormonal Treatment for Postmenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor Positive Advanced Breast Cancer | |
| fulvestrant 500mg versus fulvestrant 250mg | |||
| D6997L00021, 3000 NCT01300351 | Fulvestrant 500mg (2 syringes of Fulvestrant 250mg), Fulvestrant 500 mg i.m. every 28 (+/- 3) days plus an additional 500 mg on day 14 (+/-3) of first month only versus Fulvestrant 250mg (1 syringe of fulvestrant 250mg + 1 syringe matching placebo), Fulvestrant 250 mg and matching placebo i.m. every 28 (+/- 3) days plus an additional 2 placebo syringes on day 14 (+/-3) of first month only | Chinese postmenopausal women with oestrogen receptor positive advanced breast cancer who have failed a prior endocrine treatment | double-blind China |
| CONFIRM (Di Leo), 2010 NCT00099437 | fulvestrant 500 mg
(500 mg intramuscularly [IM] on day 0, then 500 mg IM on days 14 and 28 and every 28 days
thereafter) versus fulvestrant 250 mg every 28 days | women with oestrogen receptor positive advanced breast cancer who have failed on a previous endocrine treatment | double-blind US |
| FINDER 1 (Ohno), 2010 | 28-day cycles of fulvestrant versus | postmenopausal Japanese women with advanced breast cancer | |
| FINDER 2, 2010 NCT00313170 | 500 mg (high dose [HD]; 500 mg/month plus 500 mg on day 14 of Month 1). versus fulvestrant: 250 mg/month (approved dose [AD]); | Western postmenopausal women recurring or progressing after prior endocrine therapy | |
| gemcitabine versus epirubicin | |||
| Feher, 2005 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + docetaxel versus capecitabine + docetaxel | |||
| Seidman, 2011 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + docetaxel versus capecitabine plus docetaxel | |||
| Chan, 2009 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + docetaxel versus docetaxel | |||
| Nielsen, 2011 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel monotherapy | |||
| Albain, 2008 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + paclitaxel + bevacizumab versus paclitaxel + bevacizumab | |||
| Brufsky, 2011 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + vinorelbine versus vinorelbine monotherapy | |||
| Martín, 2007 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine + weekly docetaxel versus weekly docetaxel | |||
| Papadimitriou, 2009 | versus | ||
| gemcitabine, epirubicin, paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| CECOG BM1, 2005 | gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2), days 1 and 4), epirubicin (90 mg/m(2), day 1), and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), day 1) versus FU (500 mg/m(2), day 1), epirubicin (90 mg/m(2), day 1), and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m(2), day 1) | first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer | |
| high-dose chemotherapy versus conventional-dose chemotherapy | |||
| ECOG, 200 | high-dose chemotherapy plus autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantatio versus Conventional-dose chemotherapy | women with metastatic breast cancer | |
| IBDIS, 2003 | versus | ||
| NCIC, 2001 | versus | ||
| PEGASE 03, 2002 | versus | ||
| PEGASE 04, 1999 | HD-CT using the CMA regimen (Mitoxantrone, Cyclophosphamide, Melphalan) versus maintenance CT | ||
| Schmid, 2005 | double HDCT with cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, and etoposide followed by peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation versus standard combination therapy with doxorubicin and paclitaxel | ||
| intermittent tamoxifen versus Intermittent tamoxifen | |||
| Beex, 2006 | versus | first line endocrine treatment in advanced breast | |
| ixabepilone (on top capecitabine) versus no ixabepilone | |||
| Sparano, 2010 | ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1) plus capecitabine (2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14) given every 21 days versus capecitabine alone (2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule) given every 21 days | patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracycline and taxanes | open |
| Thomas, 2007 | ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle plus capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle versus capecitabine alone 2,500 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle | patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing after anthracycline and taxane treatment | open |
| lapatinib + capecitabine versus capecitabine alone | |||
| Geyer, 2006 NCT00078572 | lapatinib at a dose of 1250 mg per day continuously plus capecitabine at a dose of 2000 mg per square meter of body-surface area on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle versus monotherapy (capecitabine alone at a dose of 2500 mg per square meter on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle) | Women with HER2-positive, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that had progressed after treatment with regimens that included an anthracycline, a taxane, and trastuzumab | open-label |
| lapatinib + letrozole versus letrozole alone | |||
| Johnston (EGF30008) , 2009 NCT00073528 | daily letrozole (2.5 mg orally) plus lapatinib (1,500 mg orally) versus letrozole | hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| lapatinib + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone | |||
| Di Leo, 2008 NCT00075270 | first-line therapy with paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks plus lapatinib 1,500 mg/d versus paclitaxel | first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| letrozole versus aminoglutethimide | |||
| Gershanovich, 1998 | versus | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anti-estrogens | |
| letrozole versus anastrozole | |||
| Rose, 2003 | versus | second-line endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer | |
| letrozole versus atamestane + toremifene | |||
| Goss, 2007 | versus | postmenopausal women with advanced receptor-positive breast cancer | |
| letrozole versus fadrozole | |||
| Tominaga, 2003 | versus | ||
| letrozole versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Buzdar, 2001 | versus | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with antiestrogens | |
| Dombernowsky, 1998 | versus | patients with locally advanced, locoregionally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer | |
| letrozole versus tamoxifen | |||
| Mourisden, 2001 | versus | first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer | |
| Letrozole plus bevacizumab versus letrozole | |||
| Dickler (CALGB 40503°, 2015 | versus | ||
| loading dose regimen of tamoxifen versus conventional dosing | |||
| Spooner, 1991 | versus | advanced breast cancer | |
| locoregional treatment versus no treatment of the primary tumour | |||
| Badwe, 2015 | versus | ||
| long versus short | |||
| Ejlertsen, 1993 | cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil (CEF) once every 3 weeks for a maximum of 18 months versus identical chemotherapy for a maximum of 6 months | ||
| French Epirubicin Study Group, 2000 | 11 cycles of fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 75 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) (FEC 75) every 21 days; versus four cycles of FEC 100 then restart the same regimen at disease progression in case of prior response or stabilization | ||
| maintenance versus control | |||
| Harris, 1990 | continue until disease progression versus stop chemotherapy | patients with advanced recurrent breast cancer treated with four courses of mitozantrone 14 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks (9 weeks) | |
| Muss, 1991 | continued treatment with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (maintenance therapy) versus no further treatment | women with metastatic breast cancer with six courses of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil given every three weeks | |
| Gregory, 1997 | up to six extra courses of chemotherapy versus | ||
| Falkson, 1998 | maintenance therapy: cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil, prednisone, tamoxifen, and halotestin [CMF(P)TH] versus observation | ||
| Nooij, 2003 | Continuation of CMF versus | non-progressing metastatic breast cancer patients after induction chemotherapy (CMF) | |
| Gennari, 2006 | eight courses of maintenance paclitaxel versus | ||
| Alba, 2010 | PLD (40 mg/m(2)) every 28 days for six cycles versus | Patients without disease progression following first-line induction chemotherapy consisting of three cycles of doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) followed by three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)) both every 21 days | |
| medroxyprogesterone acetate versus CAF | |||
| Abe, 1995 | versus | ||
| medroxyprogesterone acetate versus CAF followed by CMF | |||
| Edimburg, 1979 | versus | Women with local or systemic advanced breast cancer considered to be beyond control by local treatment alone | |
| medroxyprogesterone acetate + CAF versus CAF alone | |||
| Abe, 1995 | versus | ||
| Tominaga, 1994 | versus | ||
| medroxyprogesterone acetate + CT versus CT alone | |||
| Gundersen, 1992 | versus | ||
| megesterol acetate versus mitozantrone | |||
| Dixon, 1992 | versus | patients with advanced breast cancer unresponsive to tamoxifen | |
| modified 3-weekly intravenous CMF versus CMF | |||
| EORTC 10808 (Engelsman), 1991 | modified 3-weekly intravenous CMF versus cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil | ||
| motesanib + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel | |||
| Martin (motesanib), 2011 NCT00356681 | motesanib 125 mg orally once per da versus placebo | patients with untreated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| MPEPIV or MPEMi versus CMF | |||
| Cocconi G, 1996 | versus | ||
| MV versus FAC/FEC | |||
| Namer, 2001 | mitoxantrone+vinorelbine (MV) versus 5-fluorouracil+cyclophosphamide+either doxorubicin or epirubicin (FAC/FEC) | ||
| nab-paclitaxel versus docetaxel | |||
| Gradishar, 2009 NCT00274456 | weekly and every 3 week (q3w) nab-paclitaxel versus docetaxel | first-line treatment in patients with MBC | |
| nab-paclitaxel +gencotabine versus gencitabine | |||
| Roy, 2008 NCT00110084 | weekly nab (nanoparticle albumin-bound)-paclitaxel in combination with gemcitabine versus | patients with previously untreated metastatic breast cancer | |
| olaparib versus Physician s choice chemotherapy | |||
| OlympiAD, 2017 NCT02000622 | Olaparib (Olaparib tablet 300mg bd po) versus Physician's choice chemotherapy (Capecitabine 2500 mg/m2 d1-14 q 21, or Vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 d1,8 q 21, or Eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 d1,8 q 21) | women with human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)–negative metastatic breast cancer with a germline BRCA mutation | open label Follow-up duration: 14.5 months |
| oophorectomy + CAF versus CAF alone | |||
| Falkson, 1995 | versus | ||
| pacclitaxel versus capecitabine | |||
| Talbot, 2002 | i.v. paclitaxel (175 mg m(-2), versus 3-week cycles of intermittent oral capecitabine (1255 mg m(-2) twice daily, days 1-14, | ||
| paclitaxel versus cisplatin, etoposide | |||
| TOG, 2005 | versus | ||
| paclitaxel versus CMFP | |||
| ANZ TITG, 1999 | paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) over 3 hours for eight cycles (24 weeks) versus standard cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m(2)/d orally on days 1 to 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8, fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8, and prednisone 40 mg/m(2)/d orally on days 1 to 14 (CMFP) for six cycles (24 weeks) with epirubicin re | front-line therapy in untreated metastatic breast cancer | |
| paclitaxel versus doxorubicin | |||
| ECOG E1193 (B), 2003 | paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)/24 h), versus doxorubicin (60 mg/m(2)), | patients with metastatic breast cancer | |
| EORTC 10923, 2000 | versus | first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer | |
| paclitaxel versus mitomycin | |||
| Dieras, 1995 | paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 given as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks versus mitomycin 12 mg/m2 given as an intravenous infusion every 6 weeks | advanced breast cancer | |
| paclitaxel + doxorubicin versus doxorobicin + cyclophosphamide | |||
| EORTC 10961, 2002 | Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide | first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer | |
| paclitaxel + doxorubicin versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| Jassem, 2001 | versus | first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer | |
| paclitaxel + epirubicin versus epirubicin, cyclophosphamide | |||
| UKCCCR AB01, 1997 | EP (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2) versus EC (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles | first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer | |
| palbociclib + fulvestrant versus fulvestrant alone | |||
| PALOMA 3, 2015 NCT01942135 | palbociclib (125 mg per day orally for 3 weeks,
followed by 1 week off) and fulvestrant (500 mg
intramuscularly per standard of care every 14 days
for the first three injections and then every
28 days) versus placebo and fulvestrant | women with HR+, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer whose disease has progressed after prior endocrine therapy | double-blind 17 countries |
| palbociclib + letrozole versus letrozole alone | |||
| PALOMA-2, 2016 NCT01740427 | PD-0332991, 125mg, orally once daily on Day 1 to Day 21 of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment in combination with Letrozole, 2.5mg, orally once daily (continuously).) versus Placebo, 125mg, orally once daily on Day 1 to Day 21 of every 28-day cycle followed by 7 days off treatment in combination with Letrozole, 2.5mg, orally once daily (continuously | postmenopausal women with ER(+)/HER2(-) advanced breast cancer who have not received prior systemic anti cancer therapies for their advanced/metastatic disease | double-blind USA |
| PALOMA 1/TRIO-18, 2015 NCT00721409 | continuous oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily plus oral palbociclib 125 mg, given once daily for 3 weeks followed by 1 week off over 28-day cycles versus continuous oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily | postmenopausal women with advanced oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer who had not received any systemic treatment for their advanced disease | open-label |
| PCb versus PE | |||
| Fountzilas, 2002 | versus | ||
| pertuzumab + trastuzumab +docetaxel versus trastuzumab + docetaxel | |||
| CLEOPATRA, 2012 NCT00567190 | pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel | patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| neoSphere (Group B), 2012 NCT00545688 | pertuzumab and trastuzumab
plus docetaxel versus trastuzumab plus docetaxel | women with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early HER2-positive breast cancer | |
| ribociclib (LEE011) + letrozole versus letrozole alone | |||
| MONALEESA-2, 2016 NCT01958021 | ribociclib
(600 mg per day on a 3-weeks-on, 1-week-off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg per
day) versus placebo + letrozole | postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative recurrent or metastatic breast cancer who had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced disease | double-blind Follow-up duration: 18 months 29 countries |
| sequentially versus combination | |||
| ANZBC, 1986 | treatment sequences, doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC) followed on failure by tamoxifen (TAM), and TAM followed by AC versus combined modality chemo-endocrine therapy (TAM plus AC). | ||
| sorafenib + capecitabine versus capecitabine alone | |||
| Baselga, 2012 | - or second-line capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) orally twice a day for days 1 to 14 of every 21-day cycle with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day versus capecitabine alone | HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| sorafenib + gemcitabine or capecitabine versus gemcitabine or capecitabine alone | |||
| Schwartzberg, 2013 NCT00493636 | sorafenib (400 mg, twice daily) versus placebo | patients with HER-2-negative advanced breast cancer that progressed during or after bevacizumab | double-blind |
| sorafenib + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone | |||
| Gradishar, 2013 | paclitaxel (90mg/m(2), weekly, intravenously, 3 weeks on/1 week off) plus sorafenib (400mg, orally, twice daily) versus paclitaxel (90mg/m(2), weekly, intravenously, 3 weeks on/1 week off) | first-line therapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer | double-blind |
| split dose versus Every three weeks Paclitaxel | |||
| Khoo , 2006 | split-dose paclitaxel or docetaxel in combination with gemcitabine versus Every three weeks Gemc. Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 | Metastatic patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had previously received anthracyclines | |
| tamofixen combination versus tamofixen sequential | |||
| ANZBC, 1986 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus bilateral oophorectomy | |||
| Ingle, 1986 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus CMF | |||
| Taylor, 1986 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus diethylstilbestrol | |||
| Gockerman, 1986 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus medroxyprogesterone | |||
| Muss, 1994 | versus | patients with metastatic breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen versus medroxyprogesterone acetate | |||
| Castiglione-Gertsch, 1993 | versus | ||
| van, 1986 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Stuart, 1996 | versus | advanced and recurrent breast cancer | |
| Gill, 1993 | versus | patients with metastatic breast cancer | |
| Ettinger, 1986 | versus | advanced breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen versus nandrolone decanoate | |||
| Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, 1987 | versus | advanced breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen versus no systemic treatment | |||
| Beelen, 2014 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen versus ovarian ablation | |||
| Sawka, 1997 | versus | metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women | |
| tamoxifen versus radiotherapy | |||
| Willsher, 1996 | versus | Locally advanced breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen versus surgical oophorectomy | |||
| Buchanan, 1986 | versus | premenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen + CAF versus CAF alone | |||
| CLKGB 8081 (Perry), 1987 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen + CAT versus CAT | |||
| Perry, 1985 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen + CMF versus CMF | |||
| Mouridsen, 1985 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen + CMF versus CMF alone | |||
| Mouridsen, 1985 | versus | ||
| Viladiu, 1985 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen + CMFV versus CMVF alone | |||
| Boccardo, 1985 | versus | ||
| tamoxifen + fluoxymesterone + CAF versus CAF | |||
| ECOG E3186 (Sledge), 2000 | chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil CAF) versus chemohormonal therapy (CAF plus tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone) | patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or ER-unknown metastatic breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen 20 mg/day versus 40 mg/day | |||
| Takatsuka, 1989 | versus | advanced breast cancer | |
| tamoxifen and drostanolone propionate versus CMF | |||
| Clavel, 1982 | versus | ||
| taselisib + fulvestrant versus fulvestrant alone | |||
| SANDPIPER, 2018 NCT02340221 | taselisib (4 mg oral, qd) FULV (500 mg) versus palcebo FULV (500 mg) | postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-negative, PIK3CA-mutant, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer after recurrence or progression during or after an aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy | double-blind USA |
| temsirolimus + letrozole versus letrozole alone | |||
| HORIZON, 2013 NCT00083993 | oral letrozole 2.5 mg daily/temsirolimus 30 mg daily (5 days every 2 weeks) versus letrozole/placebo | first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer | double-blind |
| toremifene versus tamoxifen | |||
| Nomura, 1993 | versus | patients with advanced or recurrent breast cancer | double-blind |
| Gershanovich, 1997 | versus | ||
| Milla-Santos, 2001 | toremifene (TOR) 60 mgs/dayly/o.r. versus tamoxifen (TAM) 40 mgs/dayly/o.r. | postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, without previous systemic therapy | double-blind |
| Hayes, 1995 | toremifene (TOR; 60 mg/d [TOR60] and 200 mg/d versus tamoxifen (TAM; 20 mg/d) | postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive or -unknown metastatic breast cancer | |
| Stenbygaard, 1993 | versus | ||
| Pyrhonen, 1997 | versus | post-menopausal patients with advanced breast cancer who have not had prior systemic therapy | |
| trastuzumab + anastrozole versus anastrozole alone | |||
| TAnDEM (Kaufman), 2009 | anastrozole (1 mg/d orally) with trastuzumab (4 mg/kg intravenous infusion on day 1, then 2 mg/kg every week) until progression versus anastrozole | postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer | |
| trastuzumab + capecitabine versus capecitabine alone | |||
| von Minckwitz, 2009 | trastuzumab + capecitabine versus capecitabine alone | Patients with HER-2-positive breast cancer that progresses during treatment with trastuzumab | |
| trastuzumab + docetaxel versus docetaxel alone | |||
| Marty, 2005 M77001 | versus | patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer administered as first-line treatment | |
| trastuzumab + lapatinib versus lapatinib alone | |||
| Blackwell, 2010 | lapatinib + trastuzumab versus lapatinib alone | women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer | |
| trastuzumab + letrozole versus letrozole alone | |||
| Huober, 2012 | letrozole plus trastuzumab versus letrozole alone | patients with HER2-positive, hormone-receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer | |
| trastuzumab + paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone | |||
| Gasparini, 2006 | trastuzumab + weekly paclitaxel versus weekly paclitaxel | patients with advanced breast cancer overexpressing HER-2. | |
| trastuzumab + standard chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy alone | |||
| Slamon, 2001 | standard chemotherapy plus trastuzumab versus standard chemotherapy alone | women with metastatic breast cancer that overexpressed HER2 | |
| trastuzumab emtansine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine | |||
| EMILIA, 2012 NCT00829166 | Trastuzumab emtansine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine | patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer, who had previously been treated with trastuzumab and a taxane | |
| trastuzumab emtansine versus usual care | |||
| TH3RESA, 2014 NCT01419197 | trastuzumab emtansine versus physician's choice | patients with progressive HER2-positive advanced breast cancer who had received two or more HER2-directed regimens in the advanced setting | open-label |
| vorozole versus megestrol acetate | |||
| Goss, 1999 | versus | ||
| VP-16+P versus paclitaxel | |||
| Icli, 2002 | versus | ||
| VPCMF + oophorectomy versus oophorectomy | |||
| Falkson, 1979 | oophorectomy + vincristine, prednisone, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (VPCMF) versus oophorectomy followed by an observation period (Phase 1), followed by VPCMF (Phase 2) | ||
| Weekly Docetaxel versus Every three weeks Docetaxel | |||
| Rivera , 2008 | Weekly Docetaxel 35–40 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Docetaxel 75–100 mg/m2 | Metastatic patients with metastatic breast cancer | open |
| Tabernero , 2004 | Weekly Docetaxel 40 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Sedky , 2002 | Weekly Docetaxel 35 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Willemse , 2007 | Weekly Docetaxel 36 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Weekly Paclitaxel versus Every three weeks Docetaxel | |||
| Gradishar , 2009 | Weekly Nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Fountzilas , 2008 | Weekly Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Gemc. Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Weekly Paclitaxel versus Every three weeks Paclitaxel | |||
| CLGB 9840 (Seidman), 2008 | Weekly Paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Frasci , 2006 | Weekly Epi CDDP Paclitaxel 120 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Epi Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 | LABC | |
| Frasci , 2005 | Weekly Epi CDDP Paclitaxel 120 mg/m2 versus Every three weeks Epi Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
| Sikov , 2002 | Weekly Paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 versus Split D1,8 every three weeks Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 | Metastatic | |
-
About
-
Browse pathology
|
treatment
-
Site map
-
Credits
Made with in Lyon
-
Contact us
-
Privacy policy
-
