The NAME Trial: A Direct Comparison of Classical Oral Navelbine Versus Metronomic Navelbine in Metastatic Breast Cancer

Sven Tyge Langkjer(Aarhus University Hospital), Julia Kenholm(Regionshospitalet Herning), Jeanette Dupont Jensen(Odense University Hospital), Kim Wedervang, Annette Torbøl Brixen(Herlev Hospital), Mie Grunnet(Rigshospitalet), Lars Stenbygaard(Svendborg Sygehus), Bjørnar Gilje(Stavanger University Hospital), Hella Danø, Vesna Glavicic(Næstved Sygehus), E.H. Jacobsen(Hospital South West Jutland), Anne Sofie Brems-Eskildsen(Aarhus University Hospital), Helle Lemvig Kruse(Aarhus University Hospital), T. Dongsgaard(Regionshospitalet Herning), Jeppe Neimann(Aarhus University Hospital), Jürgen Geisler(University of Oslo)
Future Oncology
June 19, 2019
Cited by 9Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

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.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis