I don't really see any difference between them. The EOC has very few specific dogmas: the dogma of Theotokos (Mother of God) is one that comes to mind. The Creed, altogether is dogmatic. If you don't believe the Creed, you are not Orthodox. One word added or left out, and you are not Orthodox (i.e. filioque issue with the RCC).
You can't be Orthodox and not accept the dogmas. But you can't be orthodox and not accept, or at least defer to the doctrines (teachings) of the Church. The two are interrelated and inseparable. Dogmas cannot contradict teachings (doctrines) and vice versa. Both have to be backed by consensus not only of the clergy but of the laity as well.
Doctrine can be expanded but it cannot contradict dogmas. Dogmas cannot be expanded. Dogma would be saying FK is human. Doctrine would be your biography, who you are what you have done, etc. Thus, the Holy Trinity cannot be added to or reduced. Christ's two natures and two wills, unconfused, in one Person cannot be changed, added, modified. They are all-inclusive truth believed by the Church. Doctrines attempt to make dogmas 'comprehensible' but they cannot be any different then dogma.
FK, what kosta has written at #597 is right on the money. The only thing I would add is our Orthopraxis, which is the dogma and doctrine in action. It expresses in our liturgies, devotions, prayer and daily lives the dogmas and doctrines of The Church. The actual forms of these things can, to a small degree, change, for example fasting practices have changed a number of times throughout history as have the liturgies around the edges; at one point in time there were canons which forbade Christians from going to a Jewish doctor or riding in public conveyances with Jews but these are no longer even remotely viable.
The only other thing I would say is that Orthodoxy does not define things to the extent the Latin Church, or the West in general I suppose, does. We don't have a specific corpus of canon law, for example, the way the Latin Church does. For this reason Orthodoxy often looks rather "loosey-goosey" to Western Christian eyes, but in fact we tend to be rather more firm on dogma, doctrine and praxis across all elements of The Church than even the Latin Church is.
OK, I think I get it better now, thanks. Dogmas cannot be modified, and doctrines can, provided they don't contradict any dogmas and have been accepted by the Church. I have a memory from the L&E thread of needing to be careful of whether I called something a doctrine or a dogma, but I can't remember the context. I think I was speaking with a Catholic at the time. Perhaps it was about the celibacy of priests issue, but I can't remember. Oh well, I know now that you treat accepted doctrines as authority.