Efficacy and Side Effects of Generic (Osloda®) and Brand-Name (Xeloda®) Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer

Main Article Content

Parastoo Hajian
Farnaz Tabatabaie
Hamidreza Mirzaei

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and side effects of brand-name capecitabine (Xeloda®) vs. generic (Osloda®) in metastatic breast cancer.

Methods: In this non-randomized clinical trial, 39 patients with metastatic breast cancer were included and divide into Xeloda® (19 patients, mean age of 49.5 years) or Osloda® (20 patients, mean age of 51.7 years) groups. A total of six 3-week cycles (1250 mg/m2 daily) were administered. Efficacy and side effects were documented in a three-year follow-up period.

Results: The four most common treatment-related adverse events did not differ significantly in Xeloda group vs. Osloda group including hand-foot syndrome (68.4% vs. 65%, P= 0.82), Anorexia (47.4% vs. 50%, P= 0.86), pain (57.9% vs. 40%; P= 0.26), and nausea (52.6% vs. 35%; P= 0.26). Most patients in both groups (25 subjects) showed partial response. Nine patients in each group died (47.4% in Xeloda group and 45% in Osloda group, P= 0.88). Mean overall survival was 20.13 months in Xeloda group and 25.82 months in Osloda group (P= 0.47).

Conclusion: Xeloda and Osloda had comparable efficacy and side effects in metastatic                    breast cancer. Considering the lower cost of Osloda, this agent can be used instead of           Xeloda.

Keywords:
Capecitabine, breast cancer, metastasis, adverse event, side effect, efficacy

Article Details

How to Cite
Hajian, P., Tabatabaie, F., & Mirzaei, H. (2020). Efficacy and Side Effects of Generic (Osloda®) and Brand-Name (Xeloda®) Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer. International Research Journal of Oncology, 3(2), 31-37. Retrieved from https://journalirjo.com/index.php/IRJO/article/view/30128
Section
Original Research Article

References

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7-30.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21332

Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015; 65(2):87-108. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21262

Zeichner SB, Terawaki H, Gogineni K. A review of systemic treatment in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer (Auckl). 2016;10:25-36.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.4137/BCBCR.S32783

Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005; 365(9472):1687-717. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66544-0

Babacan T, Efe O, Hasirci AS, Demirci F, Buyukhatipoglu H, Balakan O, et al. Efficacy of capecitabine monotherapy as the first-line treatment of metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer. Tumori. 2015; 101(4):418-23. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5301/tj.5000332

Amari M, Ishida T, Takeda M, Ohuchi N. Capecitabine monotherapy is efficient and safe in all line settings in patients with metastatic and advanced breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2010;40(3):188-93.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyp145

Wang Y, Yang H, Wei JF, Meng L. Efficacy and toxicity of capecitabine-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or advanced breast cancer: results from ten randomized trials. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012;28(12):1911-9.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2012.748655

Ershler WB. Capecitabine monotherapy: Safe and effective treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Oncologist. 2006;11(4):325-35. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.11-4-325

Fumoleau P, Largillier R, Clippe C, Dieras V, Orfeuvre H, Lesimple T, et al. Multicentre, phase II study evaluating capecitabine monotherapy in patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2004;40(4):536-42.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2003.11.007

Stathopoulos GP, Koutantos J, Lazaki H, Rigatos SK, Stathopoulos J, Deliconstantinos G. Capecitabine (Xeloda) as monotherapy in advanced breast and colorectal cancer: Effectiveness and side-effects. Anticancer Res. 2007(3B); 27:1653-6.

[PMID: 17595791]

Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2): 228-47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026

Dupont AG, Heller F. Generics and cost-effective prescribing in Belgium: does bioequivalence always translate in therapeutic equivalence? Acta Clin Belg. 2009;64(5):406-14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1179/acb.2009.067

Zargarzadeh AH, Emami MH, Hosseini F. Drug-related hospital admissions in a generic pharmaceutical system. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2007;34(5-6):494-8.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1681.2007.04600.x

Borgheini G. The bioequivalence and therapeutic efficacy of generic versus brand-name psychoactive drugs. Clin Ther. 2003;25(6):1578-92.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2918(03)80157-1

Heller FR, Dupont AG. Generics: need for clinical concern? Acta Clin Belg. 2009; 64(5):415-22. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1179/acb.2009.068

Oshaughnessy JA, Blum J, Moiseyenko V, Jones SE, Miles D, Bell D, et al. Randomized, open-label, phase II trial of oral capecitabine (Xeloda) vs. a reference arm of intravenous CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil) as first-line therapy for advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2001;12(9):1247-54.

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1012281104865