The NAME trial: a direct comparison of classical oral Navelbine versus Metronomic Navelbine in metastatic breast cancer.
Sven Tyge LangkjerJulia KenholmJeanette Dupont JensenKim WedervangAnnette Torbøl BrixenMie GrunnetLars StenbygaardBjørnar GiljeHella DanøVesna GlavicicErik Hugger JacobsenAnne Sofie Brems-EskildsenHelle Lemvig KruseTrine DongsgaardJeppe NeimannJürgen GeislerPublished in: Future oncology (London, England) (2019)
Chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is in general given in cycles of maximum tolerated doses to potentially maximize the therapeutic outcome. However, when compared with targeted therapies for MBC, conventional and dose intensified chemotherapy has caused only modest survival benefits during the recent decades, often compromising the quality of life considerably. Navelbine is an antineoplastic agent that has shown efficacy in the treatment of a variety of cancer types, including breast cancer. Early clinical trials involving both breast cancer and lung cancer patients suggest that metronomic dosing of Navelbine might be at least as effective as classical administration (once weekly, etc.). The NAME trial compares these two strategies of Navelbine administration in MBC patients.
Keyphrases
- metastatic breast cancer
- clinical trial
- end stage renal disease
- phase ii
- phase iii
- study protocol
- newly diagnosed
- ejection fraction
- chronic kidney disease
- papillary thyroid
- peritoneal dialysis
- prognostic factors
- randomized controlled trial
- open label
- squamous cell carcinoma
- radiation therapy
- patient reported outcomes
- young adults
- double blind
- lymph node metastasis
- rectal cancer
- replacement therapy