Cited by 128Breast Cancer Treatment StudiesEstrogen and related hormone effectsAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies

Evaluation of tamoxifen doses with and without fluoxymesterone in advanced breast cancer.

TORMEY, DOUGLASS C., LIPPMAN, MARC E., EDWARDS, BRENDA K., CASSIDY, JANE G.·1983·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

From a group of 108 female patients with measurable and/or evaluable metastatic breast carcinoma, 52 were randomized to receive tamoxifen and 56 to receive tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone. The fluoxymesterone dose, given orally twice a day, was 7 mg/m2 body surface area. The tamoxifen dose per patient, also given orally twice a day, ranged from 2 to 100 mg/m2 body surface area. Eighty-five percent of the patients had received previous chemotherapy and 60% previous hormone therapy. The complete and partial remission rate was better with the tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone regimen (p = 0.016), with remission rates of 15% for tamoxifen alone and 38% for the combination. The tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone regimen appeared to have higher remission rates in all subsets of pretreatment variables. Duration of remission with each regimen was similar, but the overall time to treatment failure for tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone was longer than for tamoxifen alone (180 versus 64 days, p = 0.01). Median survival with the combination was 380 days compared to 330 days for tamoxifen. No significant dose-response relationships emerged. Side effects were not different between dose levels or regimens except for the androgen effects in the tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone combination. These results suggest that there is no major dose-response effect for doses ranging from 2 to 100 mg/m2 body surface area given twice daily in this largely (94%) postmenopausal pretreated patient group, and that the tamoxifen and fluoxymesterone regimen is superior to tamoxifen alone.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-98-2-139

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
TORMEY, D. C., LIPPMAN, M. E., EDWARDS, B. K., & CASSIDY, J. G.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1983-02-01
Volume
98
Issue
2
Pages
139-144
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W1979045952
Cited by
128
References
15
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA014520)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Keywords
tamoxifen, fluoxymesterone, advanced breast cancer, metastatic breast cancer, combined hormone therapy, dose-response relationship, remission rate, time to treatment failure, survival, androgenic side effects, postmenopausal women, previously treated patients
MeSH terms
Adult, Breast Neoplasms, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Fluoxymesterone, Humans, Middle Aged, Tamoxifen

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review