Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience
Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination r...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
He, Aina [verfasserIn] Qi, Weixiang [verfasserIn] Huang, Yujing [verfasserIn] Sun, Yuanjue [verfasserIn] Shen, Zan [verfasserIn] Zhao, Hui [verfasserIn] Yang, Yumei [verfasserIn] Yao, Yang [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2012 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: International journal of clinical oncology - Tokyo : Springer, 1996, 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:18 ; year:2012 ; number:3 ; day:26 ; month:04 ; pages:498-505 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR00890457X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR00890457X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230519224520.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201005s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR00890457X | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
| 084 | |a 44.81 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a He, Aina |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2012 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Osteosarcoma |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Pirarubicin |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cisplatin |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Gemcitabine |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Docetaxel |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ifosfamide |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Qi, Weixiang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Huang, Yujing |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sun, Yuanjue |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shen, Zan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhao, Hui |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Yumei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yao, Yang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal of clinical oncology |d Tokyo : Springer, 1996 |g 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 |w (DE-627)300187033 |w (DE-600)1481773-1 |x 1437-7772 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:18 |g year:2012 |g number:3 |g day:26 |g month:04 |g pages:498-505 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_267 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_711 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2070 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2116 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2119 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2472 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.81 |q ASE |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 18 |j 2012 |e 3 |b 26 |c 04 |h 498-505 | ||
| author_variant |
a h ah w q wq y h yh y s ys z s zs h z hz y y yy y y yy |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:14377772:2012----::oprsnfiauiibsdessectbndctxlhmteayorlpeadercoyses |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2012 |
| bklnumber |
44.81 |
| publishDate |
2012 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 doi (DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.81 bkl He, Aina verfasserin aut Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience 2012 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 Qi, Weixiang verfasserin aut Huang, Yujing verfasserin aut Sun, Yuanjue verfasserin aut Shen, Zan verfasserin aut Zhao, Hui verfasserin aut Yang, Yumei verfasserin aut Yao, Yang verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology Tokyo : Springer, 1996 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 (DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 1437-7772 nnns volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE AR 18 2012 3 26 04 498-505 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 doi (DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.81 bkl He, Aina verfasserin aut Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience 2012 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 Qi, Weixiang verfasserin aut Huang, Yujing verfasserin aut Sun, Yuanjue verfasserin aut Shen, Zan verfasserin aut Zhao, Hui verfasserin aut Yang, Yumei verfasserin aut Yao, Yang verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology Tokyo : Springer, 1996 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 (DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 1437-7772 nnns volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE AR 18 2012 3 26 04 498-505 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 doi (DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.81 bkl He, Aina verfasserin aut Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience 2012 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 Qi, Weixiang verfasserin aut Huang, Yujing verfasserin aut Sun, Yuanjue verfasserin aut Shen, Zan verfasserin aut Zhao, Hui verfasserin aut Yang, Yumei verfasserin aut Yao, Yang verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology Tokyo : Springer, 1996 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 (DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 1437-7772 nnns volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE AR 18 2012 3 26 04 498-505 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 doi (DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.81 bkl He, Aina verfasserin aut Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience 2012 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 Qi, Weixiang verfasserin aut Huang, Yujing verfasserin aut Sun, Yuanjue verfasserin aut Shen, Zan verfasserin aut Zhao, Hui verfasserin aut Yang, Yumei verfasserin aut Yao, Yang verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology Tokyo : Springer, 1996 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 (DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 1437-7772 nnns volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE AR 18 2012 3 26 04 498-505 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 doi (DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.81 bkl He, Aina verfasserin aut Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience 2012 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 Qi, Weixiang verfasserin aut Huang, Yujing verfasserin aut Sun, Yuanjue verfasserin aut Shen, Zan verfasserin aut Zhao, Hui verfasserin aut Yang, Yumei verfasserin aut Yao, Yang verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology Tokyo : Springer, 1996 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 (DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 1437-7772 nnns volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE AR 18 2012 3 26 04 498-505 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in International journal of clinical oncology 18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505 volume:18 year:2012 number:3 day:26 month:04 pages:498-505 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Osteosarcoma Pirarubicin Cisplatin Gemcitabine Docetaxel Ifosfamide |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
International journal of clinical oncology |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
He, Aina @@aut@@ Qi, Weixiang @@aut@@ Huang, Yujing @@aut@@ Sun, Yuanjue @@aut@@ Shen, Zan @@aut@@ Zhao, Hui @@aut@@ Yang, Yumei @@aut@@ Yao, Yang @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2012-04-26T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
300187033 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
SPR00890457X |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR00890457X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519224520.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201005s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR00890457X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">He, Aina</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Osteosarcoma</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pirarubicin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cisplatin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gemcitabine</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Docetaxel</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ifosfamide</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Qi, Weixiang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huang, Yujing</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sun, Yuanjue</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shen, Zan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhao, Hui</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yang, Yumei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yao, Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">International journal of clinical oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">Tokyo : Springer, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)300187033</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1481773-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1437-7772</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:18</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2012</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:26</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:498-505</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">18</subfield><subfield code="j">2012</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">26</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">498-505</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
He, Aina |
| spellingShingle |
He, Aina ddc 610 bkl 44.81 misc Osteosarcoma misc Pirarubicin misc Cisplatin misc Gemcitabine misc Docetaxel misc Ifosfamide Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| authorStr |
He, Aina |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)300187033 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1437-7772 |
| topic_title |
610 ASE 44.81 bkl Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience Osteosarcoma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pirarubicin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cisplatin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gemcitabine (dpeaa)DE-He213 Docetaxel (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ifosfamide (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 misc Osteosarcoma misc Pirarubicin misc Cisplatin misc Gemcitabine misc Docetaxel misc Ifosfamide |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 misc Osteosarcoma misc Pirarubicin misc Cisplatin misc Gemcitabine misc Docetaxel misc Ifosfamide |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 misc Osteosarcoma misc Pirarubicin misc Cisplatin misc Gemcitabine misc Docetaxel misc Ifosfamide |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
International journal of clinical oncology |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
300187033 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
International journal of clinical oncology |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)300187033 (DE-600)1481773-1 |
| title |
Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR00890457X (SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e |
| title_full |
Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| author_sort |
He, Aina |
| journal |
International journal of clinical oncology |
| journalStr |
International journal of clinical oncology |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2012 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
498 |
| author_browse |
He, Aina Qi, Weixiang Huang, Yujing Sun, Yuanjue Shen, Zan Zhao, Hui Yang, Yumei Yao, Yang |
| container_volume |
18 |
| class |
610 ASE 44.81 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
He, Aina |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| title_auth |
Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| abstract |
Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. |
| abstractGer |
Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Qi, Weixiang Huang, Yujing Sun, Yuanjue Shen, Zan Zhao, Hui Yang, Yumei Yao, Yang |
| author2Str |
Qi, Weixiang Huang, Yujing Sun, Yuanjue Shen, Zan Zhao, Hui Yang, Yumei Yao, Yang |
| ppnlink |
300187033 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T23:47:14.054Z |
| _version_ |
1803603603945947136 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR00890457X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519224520.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201005s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR00890457X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s10147-012-0409-5-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">He, Aina</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of pirarubicin-based versus gemcitabine–docetaxel chemotherapy for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma: a single institution experience</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background The prognoses for patients with relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma are poor and the optimal treatment strategy is still to be defined. We conducted this retrospective study to compare the feasibility and efficacy of pirarubicin-based chemotherapy with gemcitabine–docetaxel combination regimens for the salvage of these patients. Methods The clinical data of 75 patients who received pirarubicin-based (n = 52) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 23) chemotherapy as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma between January 2005 and September 2011were reviewed retrospectively. Tumor response was evaluated every two chemotherapy cycles by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) scans using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Toxicity was examined according to the National Cancer Institute Toxicity Criteria grading system. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced in the two groups. The response rate was 25.0 % in patients who received pirarubicin-based chemotherapy, while it was 13.0 % in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group. Moreover, the median OS was longer in the pirarubicin-based chemotherapy group (14.0 vs. 9.0 months, P < 0.05), especially in the pirarubicin–ifosfamide (14.0 months) and pirarubicin-cisplatin (15.0 months) subgroups. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in the gemcitabine–docetaxel group (5.8 vs. 43.5 %, P < 0.05); other grade 3–4 toxicities were comparable in the two groups. Conclusions In our experience, pirarubicin-based chemotherapy was comparable with gemcitabine–docetaxel as a second-line treatment for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma, and it even seemed to show greater efficacy, with milder toxicity. Further studies, especially prospective clinical trials, focusing on pirarubicin-based treatments for relapsed and refractory osteosarcoma patients should be strongly considered.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Osteosarcoma</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pirarubicin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cisplatin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gemcitabine</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Docetaxel</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ifosfamide</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Qi, Weixiang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huang, Yujing</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sun, Yuanjue</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shen, Zan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhao, Hui</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yang, Yumei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yao, Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">International journal of clinical oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">Tokyo : Springer, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">18(2012), 3 vom: 26. Apr., Seite 498-505</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)300187033</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1481773-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1437-7772</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:18</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2012</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:26</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:498-505</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0409-5</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">18</subfield><subfield code="j">2012</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">26</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">498-505</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3999777 |