Search

Purpose: Among postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer, the aromatase inhibitor letrozole, when compared with tamoxifen, has been shown to significantly improve disease-free survival (DFS) and time to distant recurrence (TDR). We investigated whether letrozole monotherapy prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with tamoxifen monotherapy., Patients and Methods: Of 8,010 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer enrolled on the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study, 4,922 were randomly assigned to 5 years of continuous adjuvant therapy with either letrozole or tamoxifen. Of 2,459 patients enrolled in the tamoxifen treatment arm, 619 (25.2%) selectively crossed over to either adjuvant or extended letrozole after initial trial results were presented in January 2005. To gain better estimates of relative treatment effects in the presence of selective crossover, we used inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) modeling., Results: Weighted Cox models, by using IPCW, estimated a statistically significant, 18% reduction in the hazard of an OS event with letrozole treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.95). Estimates of 5-year OS on the basis of IPCW were 91.8% and 90.4% for letrozole and tamoxifen, respectively. The HRs of DFS and TDR events by using IPCW modeling were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.94) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94), respectively (P < .05 for DFS, OS, and TDR). Median follow-up was 74 months., Conclusion: Adjuvant treatment with letrozole, compared with tamoxifen, significantly reduces the risk of death, the risk of recurrent disease, and the risk of recurrence at distant sites in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Purpose: Previous analyses of the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 four-arm study compared initial therapy with letrozole or tamoxifen including patients randomly assigned to sequential treatment whose information was censored at the time of therapy change. Because this presentation may unduly reflect early events, the present analysis is limited to patients randomly assigned to the continuous therapy arms and includes protocol-defined updated results., Patients and Methods: Four thousand nine hundred twenty-two of the 8,028 postmenopausal women with receptor-positive early breast cancer randomly assigned (double-blind) to the BIG 1-98 trial were assigned to 5 years of continuous adjuvant therapy with either letrozole or tamoxifen; the remainder of women were assigned to receive the agents in sequence. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end point., Results: At a median follow-up time of 51 months, we observed 352 DFS events among 2,463 women receiving letrozole and 418 events among 2,459 women receiving tamoxifen. This reflected an 18% reduction in the risk of an event (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.95; P = .007). No predefined subsets showed differential benefit. Adverse events were similar to previous reports. Patients on tamoxifen experienced more thromboembolic events, endometrial pathology, hot flashes, night sweats, and vaginal bleeding. Patients on letrozole experienced more bone fractures, arthralgia, low-grade hypercholesterolemia, and cardiovascular events other than ischemia and cardiac failure., Conclusion: The present updated analysis, which was limited to patients on monotherapy arms in BIG 1-98, yields results similar to those from the previous primary analysis but more directly comparable with results from other trials of continuous therapy using a single endocrine agent.

Purpose: This randomized, multicenter trial compared first-line trastuzumab plus docetaxel versus docetaxel alone in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to six cycles of docetaxel 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, with or without trastuzumab 4 mg/kg loading dose followed by 2 mg/kg weekly until disease progression., Results: A total of 186 patients received at least one dose of the study drug. Trastuzumab plus docetaxel was significantly superior to docetaxel alone in terms of overall response rate (61% v 34%; P = .0002), overall survival (median, 31.2 v 22.7 months; P = .0325), time to disease progression (median, 11.7 v 6.1 months; P = .0001), time to treatment failure (median, 9.8 v 5.3 months; P = .0001), and duration of response (median, 11.7 v 5.7 months; P = .009). There was little difference in the number and severity of adverse events between the arms. Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia was seen more commonly with the combination (32%) than with docetaxel alone (22%), and there was a slightly higher incidence of febrile neutropenia in the combination arm (23% v 17%). One patient in the combination arm experienced symptomatic heart failure (1%). Another patient experienced symptomatic heart failure 5 months after discontinuation of trastuzumab because of disease progression, while being treated with an investigational anthracycline for 4 months., Conclusion: Trastuzumab combined with docetaxel is superior to docetaxel alone as first-line treatment of patients with HER2-positive MBC in terms of overall survival, response rate, response duration, time to progression, and time to treatment failure, with little additional toxicity.

Purpose: This randomized, noncomparative, parallel-group study was designed to evaluate the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of combined doxorubicin plus paclitaxel (AP) and doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated breast cancer who were unsuitable for conservative surgery., Patients and Methods: A total of 200 patients with T2-3, N0-1, M0 disease were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive preoperative chemotherapy with either doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion (AP) or doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) (AC) every 3 weeks for 4 courses followed by surgery., Results: A pCR (eradication of invasive carcinoma in tumor and in axillary lymph nodes) was found in 16% and 10% of patients in the AP and AC arms, respectively, by study center pathologists, and in 8% and 6% of patients, respectively, by independent pathologists. Patients with pCRs tended to have unifocal disease, tumors with negative hormonal receptor status, and less differentiation (Scarff, Bloom, and Richardson scale grade 3). Breast-conserving surgery was performed in 58% and 45% of patients in the AP and AC arms, respectively. An objective clinical response was achieved in 89% of patients in the AP arm and 70% in the AC arm. At a median follow-up of 31 months, disease-free survival (DFS) was higher in patients who reached pCR versus those without pCR (91% v 70%)., Conclusion: The encouraging pathologic and clinical responses of patients with breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus paclitaxel warrant additional investigation of paclitaxel in the neoadjuvant setting of breast cancer management.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of a standard anthracycline-based regimen to a dose-intensified anthracycline regimen in locally advanced breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Locally advanced breast cancer patients were randomly assigned onto a study comparing cyclophosphamide (C; 75 mg/m(2) orally days 1 to 14), epirubicin (E; 60 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV] days 1, 8), and fluorouracil (F; 500 mg/m(2) IV days 1, 8) six cycles every 28 days versus E (120 mg/m(2) IV day 1), C (830 mg/m(2) IV day 1), and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim; 5 micro g/kg/d subcutaneously days 2 to 13) six cycles every 14 days. The study was designed to detect a 15% improvement; that is, from 50% to 65% in median progression-free survival (PFS) in favor of the dose-intensified regimen., Results: A total of 448 patients were enrolled over a period of 3 years. The median dose intensity delivered for C and E reached, respectively, 85% and 87% of that planned in the CEF arm and 96% and 95% of that planned in the EC arm. The dose-intensified arm was slightly more emetogenic and generated more grade 3 to 4 anemia but less febrile neutropenia episodes. After a median follow-up of 5.5 years, 277 events have been reported. The median PFS was 34 and 33.7 months for CEF and EC, respectively (P =.68), and the 5-year survival rate was 53% and 51% for CEF and EC, respectively (P =.94)., Conclusion: Dose-intensified EC does not provide a measurable therapeutic benefit over CEF as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for unselected locally advanced breast cancer patients.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant (formerly ICI 182,780) and anastrozole in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer progressing after prior endocrine treatment., Patients and Methods: Patients (n = 451) with advanced breast cancer were randomized to receive fulvestrant 250 mg as a once-monthly (one x 5 mL) intramuscular injection or an oral dose of anastrozole 1 mg in this open, parallel-group, multicenter trial. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Secondary end points included objective response (OR) rates, defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), duration of response (DOR), and tolerability., Results: Patients were followed for a median period of 14.4 months. In terms of TTP, fulvestrant was as effective as anastrozole (hazard ratio, 0.98; confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.21; P =.84). Median TTP was 5.5 months for fulvestrant and 5.1 months for anastrozole. OR rates showed a numerical advantage for fulvestrant (20.7%) over anastrozole (15.7%) (odds ratio, 1.38; CI, 0.84 to 2.29; P =.20). Clinical benefit rates (CR + PR + stable disease > or = 24 weeks) were 44.6% for fulvestrant and 45.0% for anastrozole. Median DOR was 14.3 months for fulvestrant and 14.0 months for anastrozole. Both treatments were well tolerated, with 3.2% and 1.3% of fulvestrant- and anastrozole-treated patients, respectively, withdrawn from treatment because of an adverse event., Conclusion: Fulvestrant was as effective as anastrozole. These data confirm that fulvestrant is an additional, effective, and well-tolerated treatment for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women whose disease progressed on prior endocrine therapy.

Purpose: Docetaxel and capecitabine, a tumor-activated oral fluoropyrimidine, show high single-agent efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and synergy in preclinical studies. This international phase III trial compared efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine/docetaxel therapy with single-agent docetaxel in anthracycline-pretreated patients with MBC., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized to 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 255) or to docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 256)., Results: Capecitabine/docetaxel resulted in significantly superior efficacy in time to disease progression (TTP) (hazard ratio, 0.652; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.545 to 0.780; P =.0001; median, 6.1 v 4.2 months), overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.634 to 0.947; P =.0126; median, 14.5 v 11.5 months), and objective tumor response rate (42% v 30%, P =.006) compared with docetaxel. Gastrointestinal side effects and hand-foot syndrome were more common with combination therapy, whereas myalgia, arthralgia, and neutropenic fever/sepsis were more common with single-agent docetaxel. More grade 3 adverse events occurred with combination therapy (71% v 49%, respectively), whereas grade 4 events were slightly more common with docetaxel (31% v 25% with combination)., Conclusion: The significantly superior TTP and survival achieved with the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), with the manageable toxicity profile, indicate that this combination provides clear benefits over single-agent docetaxel 100 mg/m(2). Docetaxel/capecitabine therapy is an important treatment option for women with anthracycline-pretreated MBC.

Purpose: Expression of ErbB-1 and ErbB-2 (epidermal growth factor receptor and HER2/neu) in breast cancer may cause tamoxifen resistance, but not all studies concur. Additionally, the relationship between ErbB-1 and ErbB-2 expression and response to selective aromatase inhibitors is unknown. A neoadjuvant study for primary breast cancer that randomized treatment between letrozole and tamoxifen provided a context within which these issues could be addressed prospectively., Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal patients with estrogen- and/or progesterone receptor-positive (ER+ and/or PgR+) primary breast cancer ineligible for breast-conserving surgery were randomly assigned to 4 months of neoadjuvant letrozole 2.5 mg daily or tamoxifen 20 mg daily in a double-blinded study. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for ER and PgR was conducted on pretreatment biopsies and assessed by the Allred score. ErbB-1 and ErbB-2 IHC were assessed by intensity and completeness of membranous staining according to published criteria., Results: For study biopsy-confirmed ER+ and/or PgR+ cases that received letrozole, 60% responded and 48% underwent successful breast-conserving surgery. The response to tamoxifen was inferior (41%, P =.004), and fewer patients underwent breast conservation (36%, P =.036). Differences in response rates between letrozole and tamoxifen were most marked for tumors that were positive for ErbB-1 and/or ErbB-2 and ER (88% v 21%, P =.0004)., Conclusion: ER+, ErbB-1+, and/or ErbB-2+ primary breast cancer responded well to letrozole, but responses to tamoxifen were infrequent. This suggests that ErbB-1 and ErbB-2 signaling through ER is ligand-dependent and that the growth-promoting effects of these receptor tyrosine kinases on ER+ breast cancer can be inhibited by potent estrogen deprivation therapy.

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of anastrozole (Arimidex; AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE, and Macclesfield, United Kingdom) with that of tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer (ABC) in postmenopausal women., Patients and Methods: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy of anastrozole 1 mg once daily relative to tamoxifen 20 mg once daily in patients with tumors that were hormone receptor-positive or of unknown receptor status who were eligible for endocrine therapy. The primary end points were time to progression (TTP), objective response (OR), and tolerability., Results: A total of 668 patients (340 in the anastrozole arm and 328 in the tamoxifen arm) were randomized to treatment and followed-up for a median of 19 months. Median TTP was similar for both treatments (8.2 months in patients who received anastrozole and 8.3 months in patients who received tamoxifen). The tamoxifen:anastrozole hazards ratio was 0.99 (lower one-sided 95% confidence limit, 0.86), demonstrating that anastrozole was at least equivalent to tamoxifen. Anastrozole was also as effective as tamoxifen in terms of OR (32.9% of anastrozole and 32.6% of tamoxifen patients achieved a complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]). Clinical benefit (CR + PR + stabilization of > or = 24 weeks) rates were 56.2% and 55.5% for patients receiving anastrozole and tamoxifen, respectively. Both treatments were well tolerated. However, incidences of thromboembolic events and vaginal bleeding were reported in fewer patients treated with anastrozole than with tamoxifen (4.8% v 7.3% [thromboembolic events] and 1.2% v 2.4% [vaginal bleeding], respectively)., Conclusion: Anastrozole satisfied the predefined criteria for equivalence to tamoxifen. Together with the lower observed incidence of thromboembolic events and vaginal bleeding, these findings indicate that anastrozole should be considered as first-line therapy for postmenopausal women with ABC.

Purpose: In 1986, The Fédération Nationale desCentres de Lutte Contre le Cancer Breast Group initiated a multicenter randomized trial to assess the usefulness of long-term adjuvant tamoxifen treatment. Short-term adjuvant tamoxifen treatment was to be compared with life long adjuvant tamoxifen treatment., Patients and Methods: Patients who were disease-free after 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment were eligible for the trial. From September 1986 to May 1995, 3,793 patients were randomized from France, Belgium, and Argentina. A total of 1,882 patients stopped tamoxifen (short-term group), and 1,911 patients were to continue tamoxifen for life (long-term group) at the same dose as previously prescribed. The protocol was modified in February 1997, limiting tamoxifen treatment to 10 years after randomization, thus giving a comparison between a 2- to 3-year treatment and a 12- to 13-year treatment. To date, the median duration of tamoxifen treatment is 30 months in the short-term group, and 70 months in the long-term group., Results: Overall, longer tamoxifen treatment induced a 23% reduction in relapse rates, leading to a 7-year disease-free survival rate of 78%, compared with 72% in the shorter-treatment group. In contrast, overall survival did not differ between the two groups, with a 79% overall survival rate in both groups. This improvement in disease-free survival could be observed in node-positive patients (P: =.001); however, it was not found in node-negative patients. Prolonged tamoxifen treatment corresponded to a significant increase in disease-free survival in estrogen receptor-positive patients (P: =.03) as well as in estrogen receptor-negative patients (P: =.05). Furthermore, longer treatment reduced contralateral breast cancers and did not increase the number of endometrial cancers., Conclusion: Although no survival advantage was noted, patients did benefit from longer tamoxifen treatment over 3 years and had significantly better disease-free survival compared with patients who stopped hormonal treatment. Long-term follow-up is needed to assess these results. Most patients in the long-term group are still receiving treatment. Comparison of results as time passes will enable conclusions to be made on the value of long-term treatment over 5 years compared with 2 to 3 years.

Purpose: To confirm the efficacy of docetaxel in patients with breast cancer previously treated with one chemotherapy regimen for advanced or metastatic disease and to compare the incidence of fluid retention (FR) and skin toxicity when docetaxel is administered with and without prophylactic corticosteroids., Patients and Methods: Eighty-three patients, pretreated with one chemotherapy regimen for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with bidimensionally measurable and progressive disease, were eligible for this randomized trial. Docetaxel with prophylactic oral antihistamine was administered at a dose of 50 mg/m2 as a 1-hour infusion on days 1 and 8 every 21 days and patients were randomized to receive methylprednisolone (40 mg days -1, 0, 1, 7, 8, and 9 of each cycle) (arm A) or no methylprednisolone (arm B)., Results: Twenty-eight patients (34%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 23% to 45%) achieved on objective response. The median time to disease progression and median overall survival time were 5 and 13.5 months, respectively. In total, 415 cycles of docetaxel were administered (arm A: N = 219, median = six; arm B: N = 196, median = five). The most common toxicity observed was grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, which occurred in 79% of patients. Clinically significant nonhematologic side effects included skin reactions and asthenia. In an intent-to-treat analysis, patients who received methylprednisolone premedication had a delayed onset of FR (median time to onset of FR: arm A, 84 days; arm B, 62 days; P = .01) and received a higher median cumulative dose of docetaxel before the onset of FR (arm A, 333 mg/m2; arm B, 215 mg/m2; P = .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of skin toxicity between the two arms., Conclusion: Docetaxel, at this dose and schedule, has definite antitumor activity in pretreated MBC patients. Moreover, this is the first randomized trial to show that corticosteroids have a favorable impact on docetaxel-induced FR.

Purpose: Bone metastases are a major cause of morbidity in breast cancer, resulting in complications that include pain, loss of mobility, pathologic fracture, and tumor-induced hypercalcemia (TIH). Inhibition of osteoclast-mediated bone destruction using bisphosphonates represents a promising new management approach., Patients and Methods: Breast cancer patients with bone metastases were randomly allocated to receive chemotherapy alone (152 patients) or chemotherapy plus pamidronate 45 mg in 250 mL of saline as a 1-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (143 patients). Whenever possible, treatment continued until progression of disease (PD) in bone appeared on radiographs or bone scan. Time to PD in bone and pain reduction according to a self-assessment six-point scale were selected as primary end points. PD in bone was verified during extramural review (EMR) of all imaging studies by blinded observers, and these data were used as the main efficacy criterion. Analgesic intake, World Health Organization (WHO) performance status, and complications of bone metastases (radiotherapy, TIH, fractures, orthopedic surgery) were also compared in the two groups., Results and Conclusion: At EMR, median time to PD in bone was increased by 48% in patients who received pamidronate (249 v 168 days; P = .02, Wilcoxon test). Marked pain relief, defined as a two-point decrease lasting for > or = 6 weeks, was reported by 44% of pamidronate patients and by 30% of controls (P = .025, chi 2 test). The infusions (median, nine per patient; range, 0 to 39) were well tolerated, with no major toxicities reported. Pamidronate by repeated infusion can significantly slow the progression of bone metastases and reduce attendant morbidity.