Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2003 Feb;13(1):73-9.
doi: 10.1097/00008390-200302000-00012.

Treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma with dacarbazine plus tamoxifen, or vindesine plus tamoxifen: a prospective randomized study

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma with dacarbazine plus tamoxifen, or vindesine plus tamoxifen: a prospective randomized study

G Cocconi et al. Melanoma Res. 2003 Feb.

Abstract

This study aimed to verify whether the advantage in terms of response rate and survival of dacarbazine plus tamoxifen over dacarbazine alone in metastatic malignant melanoma reported in a previous randomized trial was due to a specific interaction of dacarbazine with tamoxifen. A total of 125 patients with locoregional or disseminated malignant melanoma were randomized to receive dacarbazine (250 mg/m(2) days 1-5 every 3 weeks) plus tamoxifen (arm A) or vindesine (3 mg/m(2) every week for 6 weeks, then every 2 weeks) plus tamoxifen (arm B). Of the 125 randomized patients, 57 and 59 were evaluable in arm A and B, respectively. The complete response rates were the same (2% versus 2%) and the complete plus partial response rates were similar (11% versus 14%) in the two groups. There was no significant difference in survival. Neither response or survival correlated with gender. In conclusion, when combined with tamoxifen, dacarbazine does not have a specific effect on response or survival compared with vindesine. The lower response rate to dacarbazine plus tamoxifen (11%) than that reported in the previous trial (28%) might be explained by actual differences in patient and/or participating centre accrual characteristics in the presence of apparently identical eligibility criteria.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources