Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “FLUOROURACIL”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Double modulation with methotrexate and L-leucovorin of weekly 24- hour fluorouracil infusion in fluorouracil-refractory colorectal cancer.

No effective second-line therapy has been developed for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer progressive after than fluorouracil(FU)-containing chemotherapy. Encouraging results have been reported with weekly 24-hour FU infusion. The aim of this study was to test the activity of weekly FU infusion plus modulation with methotrexate and L-leucovorin in pretreated colorectal cancer patients. Seventeen patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma were treated with methotrexate (40 mg/m2 on day 1), L-leucovorin (100 mg/m2 as a 4-hour infusion on day 2), and FU (2,600 mg/m2 as a 24-hour infusion on day 2). All patients had measurable disease and a performance status of ECOG O-2. Two of the 17 evaluable patients achieved partial remission (12%; 95% confidence interval 2-24%), 9 had stable disease, and 6 progressive disease. Median time to progression was 4 months (range, 2-8) and median survival was 7 months (range, 3-12+). Toxicity was generally mild or moderate and consisted of mucositis, diarrhea and neutropenia. Pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal, carcinoma benefit only marginally from this treatment schedule.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Advanced colorectal cancer, refractory to infusional fluorouracil treatment: efficacy of second line fluorouracil in combination with a different biochemical modulation.

BACKGROUND: Currently there is no standard second line treatment for patients with advanced colorectal cancer (ACC). Previous reports have demonstrated that some patients may benefit from second line infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) after failing 5-FU bolus treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied the efficacy and toxicity of infusional 5FU regimens given in second line, which only differed from the first line regimen in the type of biochemical modulation and compared these results in a non-randomized fashion to the outcome of patients receiving supportive care only in second line. RESULTS: Sixty six patients with ACC were treated in first line with an infusional 5-FU-based schedule. At the time of disease progression 38 patients received supportive care only. The remaining 28 patients continued treatment with the same 5-FU regimen, but with another biochemical modulator. Fourteen patients achieved stable disease for a median duration of 6 months and one patient achieved a complete remission which lasted 34 months. The median survival from the time of disease progression on first line treatment was 7 months for patients who received second line treatment, whereas those who received supportive care survived for a median period of 3 months (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Changing the type of biochemical modulation of infusional 5-FU as a second line treatment-alternative may be of some benefit to a subgroup of patients with ACC.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

5-Fluorouracil versus folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil in advanced, hormone-resistant prostate cancer: a prospective randomized pilot trial.

OBJECTIVES: Results of cytotoxic chemotherapy for hormone-resistant prostate cancer are not impressive. One of the substances which seems to have a therapeutic benefit is 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The effect of 5-FU can be modulated by addition of folinic acid (FA). We tested in a prospective, randomized phase II trial monotherapy with 5-FU versus the combination of 5-FU and high-dose FA. METHODS: 25 patients received 600 mg/m2 5-FU, and 24 patients 400 mg/m2 FA plus 600 or 400 mg/m2 5-FU. They were treated for two cycles for 5 days in a 21-day interval followed by a weekly single-day application until progression occurred. Pain remission, toxicity, time to progression and survival were evaluated. RESULTS: Both regimens led to a pain remission in nearly 70% of the patients. Mucosal side effects like diarrhea and stomatitis occurred more often in the combination arm, whereas leukopenias were more frequent in the monotherapy are. We observed no statistically significant difference between the two treatment arms regarding time to progression and survival. CONCLUSIONS: Although both regimens led to a pain remission, side effects are too severe to recommend these protocols for standard treatment of hormone-resistant prostate cancer.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

[Invention of a tumor-selective 5-fluorouracil derivative named S-1 by biochemical modulation of 5-fluorouracil].

A new oral type of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) derivative possessed of both potent antitumor activity and less gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was investigated and developed in the form of a combination of tegafur (FT), a masked form of 5-FU, and its two peculiar biochemical modulators. One is 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine (CDHP), a new potent inhibitor of 5-FU degradation in vivo, and another is potassium oxonate (Oxo), a characteristic inhibitor of 5-FU phosphorylation, which distributes much higher in GI tract after p.o. administration. 5-FU levels in blood of rats following administration of FT, were markedly elevated and persisted for a long-time by co-oral CDHP corresponding to over 0.4 molar ratio to FT, like the case in continuous infusion of 5-FU, which resulted in an augmentation of antitumor efficacy in Yoshida sarcoma-bearing rats, although severe GI toxicity simultaneously occurred. To reduce 5-FU-induced toxicities such as diarrhea and body weight loss and to maintain the augmented antitumor activity, 0.5 to 2 molar Oxo was orally given to rats with one molar FT plus 0.4 molar CDHP. As a result, both severe GI injury and body weight loss were markedly inhibited by coadministration of 0.5 to 1.0 molar Oxo while high antitumor efficacy (about 90% inhibition of tumor growth) was maintained. However, such almost complete antitumor effect was reduced to about 50% inhibition of tumor growth by over 2 molar Oxo combined with one molar FT plus 0.4 molar CDHP. Based on these results, a novel 5-FU derivative, named S-1, was composed of one molar FT, 0.4 molar CDHP and one molar Oxo. S-1 showed an antitumor activity over 3-fold stronger than UFT (one molar FT plus 4 molar uracil) against Yoshida sarcoma and Sato lung carcinoma in rats and human colon carcinoma (KM12C) xenografted in nude rats when its minimum toxic dose was administered. Co-oral Oxo also significantly reduced the incidence of diarrhea and stomatitis induced by administration of FT-CDHP in beagle dogs. These results suggest that high antitumor activity and less GI toxicity of S-1 was brought about by the elevation in blood and tumor tissues and by selective decrease of 5-fluoronucleotides, an active metabolite of 5-FU, in GI tract.

Animals↗
PubMed1976

Randomized prospective trial comparing 5-fluorouracil (NSC-19893) to 5-fluorouracil and methyl-CCNU (NSC-95441) in advanced gastrointestinal cancer.

The Southwest Oncology Group has confirmed the superiority of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and methyl-CCNU versus 5-FU weekly as treatment for patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers. The drug combination produced a PR rate of 29.3% compared to the single-drug arm rate of 10.6%; however, the two-drug arm produced much more toxicity. Despite the improved response rate no improvement in survival was observed.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1998

Prospective randomized trial of 5-fluorouracil versus 5-fluorouracil plus levamisole in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a Hoosier Oncology Group trial.

The purpose of this study was to compare the objective response rate, duration of remission, and survival of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) versus those of 5-FU plus levamisole in metastatic colorectal cancer using the same dose and schedule of these agents as in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group and intergroup studies of adjuvant therapy. Patients with no prior history of chemotherapy for metastatic disease were entered on this Hoosier Oncology Group randomized Phase III trial. Patients were stratified by Karnofsky performance status and presence or absence of liver metastases. They were randomized to receive 450 mg/m2 5-FU i.v. for 5 days followed by 15 mg/kg i.v. weekly (arm 1) or the same dose of 5-FU plus levamisole 50 mg p.o. every 8 h for 3 days every 2 weeks (arm 2). The duration of treatment for both arms was 26 weeks. From April 1990 to March 1995, 199 patients were entered. One hundred eighty-two patients, 91 in each arm, were fully evaluable. The response rates were 12% on arm 1 and 13% on arm 2. The median duration of response was 18 weeks on both arms. The median survival was 48 weeks on arm 1 and 41 weeks on arm 2 (P = 0.20). This study failed to show any improvement in survival, response, or duration of remission with the addition of levamisole to 5-FU in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[Sequential therapy with methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced colorectal cancer pretreated with 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid].

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a sequential low-dose methotrexate (MTX) and 5-fluorouracil (5FU) regimen in the palliative treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Enrolled in the study were patients with advanced colorectal cancer, refractory to 5FU + FA. Patients were treated with MTX 40 mg/m2 i.v. bolus d 1 and 8, 5FU 700 mg/m2 i.v. bolus d 2 and 9 (24 hours after MTX bolus). The cycle was repeated every 4 weeks. RESULTS: 48 patients entered the study, and 45 are evaluable. The overall response rate was 15% with 1 complete response and 6 partial responses. Eight patients obtained disease stabilization. Median time to progression was 9 months. Toxicity was mild. Grade 3 stomatitis was observed in 7 (15%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential MTX/5FU is a well tolerated regimen with mild antitumor activity in refractory advanced colorectal patients.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1989

An EORTC gastrointestinal (GI) group randomized evaluation of the toxicity of sequential high dose methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil combined with adriamycin (FAMTX) vs 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin and mitomycin (FAM) in advanced gastric cancer.

Until now advanced gastric cancer has been generally treated with the FAM chemotherapy protocol. Due to the relatively low response rates with this protocol we decided to start a randomized prospective phase II trial comparing the FAM with the FAMTX protocol. The primary aim of our trial was to compare the toxicity in both protocols. The FAMTX protocol has been demonstrated to be fully comparable with the toxicity of the FAM protocol. The trial has been extended to a phase III study. With respect to response rates and survival times it is too early for evaluation.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

A phase III study of recombinant interleukin-2, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin versus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal carcinoma.

135 patients with locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer were entered into a phase III trial evaluating the efficacy of chemoimmunotherapy [recombinant interleukin 2 (rIL2)/5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV)] versus chemotherapy alone (5-FU/LV). A cycle of chemoimmunotherapy comprised a constant intravenous infusion of rIL2 at a dose of 18 x 10(6) U/m2/24 h for 120 h, followed by three bolus injections of 5-FU (600 mg/m2) and LV (25 mg/m2) at weekly intervals. Patients receiving chemotherapy alone received 5-FU/LV at the same dose at weekly intervals for 6 weeks followed by a rest period of 2 weeks, constituting one cycle of therapy. A maximum of 6 months therapy was given in both arms of the study. The response rates (complete and partial responses) were 17% in patients receiving rIL2/5-FU/LV versus 16% in those in the 5-FU/LV arm of the study. Median survival and progression-free survival were comparable for the two groups of patients, although there was a trend for a prolongation of survival in patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone, beyond 12 months. Retrospective subgroup analyses revealed a significantly increased survival in poor prognosis patients (ECOG 1) treated with rIL2/5-FU/LV when compared to those receiving chemotherapy alone. Therefore, further studies evaluating the dose and duration of chemoimmunotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer seem warranted.

Adult↗