[A prospective randomized trial comparing XXXX and @entity7324 and @entity900 versus @entity7765 and @entity7324 and @entity900 in the treatment of advanced @entity1149 ].

@entity1 @entity137 @entity7324 @entity7765 @entity1138 @entity1149 @entity900 @entity1398
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the response, adverse effects and survival of MVP regimen and TVP regimen. METHODS: Sixty six @entity1 with advanced @entity1149 were randomized into two groups:MVP arm (32 @entity1 , @entity1138 6-8 mg/m   d1, @entity7324 2-3 mg/m   d1 and d8, @entity900 70-80 mg/m   d1) and TVP arm (34 @entity1 , @entity7765 40-50 mg/m   d1, @entity7324 and @entity900 were the same as arm MVP). Characteristics of the @entity1 were similar in two arms. All @entity1 received two to four cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: The overall responses were 34% (11/32) in the MVP arm and 56% (19/34) in the TVP arm. There were 1 complete response, 10 partial responses in the MVP arm and 1 complete response, 18 partial responses in the TVP arm. TVP regimen appeared to have a higher objective response, but no statistically significant difference in the response was observed between two regimens (Chi-square=2.269, P=0.132). Main side effects were hematological @entity137 . Grade III+IV hematological @entity137 were significantly higher in the @entity1 of arm TVP than arm MVP, especially @entity1398 (79% vs 44%, Chi-square=7.458, P=0.006). Median survival time was 12 months vs 8 months, and 1-, 2-, 3-year survival rates were 53% vs 24% (Chi-square=4.943, P=0.026), 17% vs 6%, 6% vs 0, for arm TVP and arm MVP, respectively.. CONCLUSIONS: MVP regimen has a lower response rate and longer survival time but less hematological @entity137 than TVP regimen. The results suggest MVP regimen is a safe and active regimen for advanced @entity1149 .
