Prognostic value of extracapsular tumor spread for locoregional control in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: long-term observations from International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine retrospectively whether extracapsular spread (ECS) might identify a subgroup that could benefit from radiotherapy after mastectomy, especially patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes (LN1-3+). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomized 1,475 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer to three, six, or nine courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil). After a review of all pathology forms, 933 patients (63%) had information on the presence or absence of ECS. ECS was present in 49.5%. The median follow-up was 10 years. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, ECS was associated with worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). In multivariate analyses adjusting for tumor size, vessel invasion, surgery type, and age group, ECS remained significant (DFS: hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.34 to 1.93; P < .0001; OS: 1.67; 95% CI, 1.34 to 2.08; P < .0001). However, ECS was not significant when the number of positive nodes was added. The locoregional failure rate +/- distant failure (LRF +/- distant failure) within 10 years was estimated at 19% (+/- 2%) without ECS, versus 27% (+/- 2%) with ECS. The difference was statistically significant in univariate analyses, but not after adjusting for the number of positive nodes. No independent effect of ECS on DFS, OS, or LRF could be confirmed within the subgroup of 382 patients with LN1-3+ treated with mastectomy without radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support an independent prognostic value of ECS, nor its use as an indication for irradiation in premenopausal patients with LN1-3+ treated with classical CMF. However, we could not examine whether extensive ECS is of prognostic importance.

Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Although chemotherapy and ovarian function suppression are both effective adjuvant therapies for patients with early-stage breast cancer, little is known of the efficacy of their sequential combination. In an International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) randomized clinical trial (Trial VIII) for pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer, we compared sequential chemotherapy followed by the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist goserelin with each modality alone. METHODS: From March 1990 through October 1999, 1063 patients stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status and radiotherapy plan were randomly assigned to receive goserelin for 24 months (n = 346), six courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy (n = 360), or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin (CMF --> goserelin; n = 357). A fourth arm (no adjuvant treatment) with 46 patients was discontinued in 1992. Tumors were classified as ER-negative (30%), ER-positive (68%), or ER status unknown (3%). Twenty percent of patients were aged 39 years or younger. The median follow-up was 7 years. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Patients with ER-negative tumors achieved better disease-free survival if they received CMF (5-year DFS for CMF = 84%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 91%; 5-year DFS for CMF --> goserelin = 88%, 95% CI = 82% to 94%) than if they received goserelin alone (5-year DFS = 73%, 95% CI = 64% to 81%). By contrast, for patients with ER-positive disease, chemotherapy alone and goserelin alone provided similar outcomes (5-year DFS for both treatment groups = 81%, 95% CI = 76% to 87%), whereas sequential therapy (5-year DFS = 86%, 95% CI = 82% to 91%) provided a statistically nonsignificant improvement compared with either modality alone, primarily because of the results among younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal women with ER-negative (i.e., endocrine nonresponsive), lymph node-negative breast cancer should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with ER-positive (i.e., endocrine responsive) disease, the combination of chemotherapy with ovarian function suppression or other endocrine agents, and the use of endocrine therapy alone should be studied.