A prospective, randomized study of Toremifene vs. tamoxifen for the treatment of premenopausal breast cancer: safety and genital symptom analysis.

BACKGROUND: Toremifene (TOR) is a selective oestrogen receptor modulator (SERM) and has comparable efficacy to that of tamoxifen (TAM) in breast cancer patients. Herein, we compared the safety of TOR to that of TAM in the adjuvant treatment of premenopausal breast cancer. METHODS: This was a prospective randomized and open-label clinical study. Premenopausal patients with hormonal receptor (HR)-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive TOR) or TAM treatment. The follow-up period was 1 year. The primary end point was the incidence of ovarian cysts, and secondary end points were the incidence of endometrial thickening, changes in female hormones, the incidence of fatty liver, changes in the modified Kupperman index (mKMI) and changes in quality of life. RESULTS: There were 92 patients in the final analysis. The incidences of ovarian cysts were 42.6% in the TOR group and 51.1% in the TAM group (p = 0.441). Forty-one patients (87.2%) in the TOR group and 36 patients (80.0%) in the TAM group experienced endometrial thickening (p = 0.348). The proportions of patients with fatty liver were 31.9% in the TOR group and 26.7% in the TAM group (p = 0.581). No significant differences in the mKMI or quality of life were observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: TOR and TAM have similar side effects on the female genital system and quality of life in premenopausal early breast cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02344940. Registered 26 January 2015 (retrospectively registered).

Toremifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, significantly improved biochemical recurrence in bone metastatic prostate cancer: a randomized controlled phase II a trial.

BACKGROUNDS: Durability of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PC) is limited. Additional selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) may prolong the durability of ADT, because androgen and estrogen signaling drive PC progression. METHODS: Men with treatment-naïve bone metastatic PC were randomly assigned in 1:1:1 fashion to receive ADT, toremifene 60 mg plus ADT (TOPADT), or raloxifene 60 mg plus ADT (RAPADT). The primary endpoint was the biochemical recurrence (BCR) rate, and secondary endpoints were changes of scores of the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT). RESULTS: A total of 15 men, 5 each, were allocated to one of the three treatment arms. The basal serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 198 ng/mL (median, range; 30-8428). Bone metastases were graded as 1 (n = 11), 2 (n = 3), and 3 (n = 1) by the extent of disease. During the median follow-up period of 1370 days (range; 431-1983), BCR occurred in 3, 0 and 2 men in ADT, TOPADT and RAPADT group, respectively. The 5-year BCR-free rate was 30, 100 and 53 %, in ADT, TOPADT and RAPADT group, respectively (p = 0.04, ADT v.s. TOPADT, p = 0.48, ADT v.s. RAPADT and p = 0.12, TOPADT v.s. RAPADT). Scores of VAS improved in all groups and remained stable throughout the study. This analysis is limited as a preliminary result in a single center. CONCLUSIONS: Toremifene with conventional ADT significantly improved the BCR rate in treatment-naïve bone metastatic PC. Further clinical trials are warranted to confirm the promising clinical efficacy of this combination therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network ( UMIN ID;0,000,064,000 ) in Sep 25, 2011.

Nano-Targeted Delivery of Toremifene, an Estrogen Receptor-α Blocker in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Estrogen Receptor-α (ERα) expression is increased in prostate cancer and acts as an oncogene. We propose that blocking of estrogen hormone binding to ERα using the ERα blocker toremifene will reduce the tumorigenicity of prostate cancer, and nano-targeted delivery of toremifene will improve anticancer efficacy. We report the synthesis and use in an orthotopic mouse model of PLGA-PEG nanoparticles encapsulating toremifene and nanoparticles encapsulating toremifene that are also conjugated to anti-PSMA for targeted prostate tumor delivery. METHODS: Human prostate cancer cell line PC3M and a nude mouse model were used to test efficacy of nano-targeted and nano-encapsulated toremifene versus free toremifene on the growth and differentiation of tumor cells. RESULTS: Treatment with free toremifene resulted in a significant reduction in growth of prostate tumor and proliferation, and its nano-targeting resulted in greater reduction of prostate tumor growth, greater toremifene tumor uptake, and enhanced tumor necrosis. Tumors from animals treated with nano-encapsulated toremifene conjugated with anti-PSMA showed about a 15-fold increase of toremifene compared to free toremifene. CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide evidence that blocking ERα by toremifene and targeting prostate cancer tissues with anti-PSMA antibody on the nanoparticles' surface repressed the tumorigenicity of prostate cancer cells in this mouse model.

Toremifene and tamoxifen have similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

A meta-analysis of randomized trials was performed to compare the efficacy of toremifene (TOR) with tamoxifen (TAM) in patients with breast cancer. A total of 4,768 intention-to-treat patients from nine randomized trials were identified, with 2,587 patients in TOR group and 2,181 patients in TAM group. The primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). The ORR for TOR group was 26.2 % (303/1,156), whereas the ORR for TAM group was 25.2 % (284/1,128). The pooled RR suggested that the ORR were not statistically different between the two therapeutic groups (RR 1.04, 95 % CI 0.91-1.20, P = 0.57). The median TTP was 6.7 months for the TOR group and 9.7 months for the TAM group. The median OS was 30.1 months for the TOR group and 31.7 months for the TAM group. There were no significant difference in TTP and OS between two therapeutic groups (for TTP: HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.82-1.00; for OS: HR 1.02, 95 % CI 0.91-1.15). Adverse events were generally similar in two therapeutic groups, but TOR may cause fewer vaginal bleeding (4.0 vs. 6.7 %, P < 0.01), headache (0.2 vs. 3.1 %, P = 0.02) and thromboembolic events (4.7 vs. 7.0 %, P = 0.04). Sensitivity analyses were performed by deleting a single study each time; all the results were not materially altered. In summary, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that TOR and TAM have similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with breast cancer.

Efficacy of high-dose toremifene therapy in postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitors:a retrospective, single-institution study.

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors(AI)have established efficacy as first-line therapy in postmenopausal patients with hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer(MBC). However,the use of endocrine therapy has not yet been established for second-line and later therapy. Our study examined the efficacy of high-dose toremifene therapy(HD-TOR)in patients with MBC resistant to AIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was carried out to determine outcomes in 85 postmenopausal patients with MBC resistant to AIs who began HD-TOR between May 2001 and October 2011. The patients received toremifene 120 mg once daily on consecutive days. RESULTS: The objective response rate(ORR)was 21.2%,the clinical benefit rate(CBR)was 41.2%,and the median time to treatment failure(TTF)was 7.3 months. The CBR was high in patients with ER-positive status(p=0.045),no visceral metastasis(p=0.037),HD -TOR as first- or second-line therapy(p=0.007),no history of tamoxifen(TAM)therapy(p=0.019),and no history of chemotherapy(p=0.017). Multivariate analysis showed that ER-positive status(p=0.005, odds ratio: 0.064)and no visceral metastasis(p=0.034, odds ratio: 0.323)were independent predictors of efficacy. The TTF was significantly longer in patients with ER-positive status(p=0.019)and no history of TAM therapy(p=0.015). Multivariate analysis showed that ER-positive status(p=0.025, hazard ratio: 0.377)and no history of TAM therapy(p=0.002, hazard ratio: 0.422)were independent predictors of efficacy. No patient discontinued HDTOR therapy due to adverse events. CONCLUSION: HD-TOR is an effective endocrine therapy for patients with MBC who have failed AIs.

Phase II clinical trial of high-dose toremifene as primary hormone therapy in aromatase inhibitor-resistant breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation aromatase inhibitors(AIs)are now common in adjuvant hormone therapy for breast cancer in postmenopausal women. However, a suitable treatment has yet to be established for patients who develop cancer recurrence during or after adjuvant AI therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 120mg/day toremifene citrate(TOR-120)administered orally to 23 patients with recurrent breast cancer who were receiving or had received adjuvant AI therapy. Primary therapy for recurrence was TOR-120 monotherapy. RESULTS: The response rate was 13. 0%(partial response: three patients), the clinical benefit rate was 78. 3%(partial response: three patients; long-term stable disease: 15 patients), and median time to progression was 8. 1 months. Grade 1 adverse events such as loss of appetite, sweating, flushing and edema face were observed. CONCLUSION: TOR-120 monotherapy was effective and safe as a primary hormone therapy for recurrent breast cancer unresponsive to AIs.

The clinical benefit of high-dose toremifene for metastatic breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Toremifene(TOR)is a selective estrogen receptor modulator(SERM). A high dose of 120 mg TOR(HD-TOR) has been used for recurrent breast cancer in Japan, but there is still insufficient evidence regarding the efficacy of HD-TOR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HD-TOR was administered for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer between January 2003 and May 2012. The primary end point of the study was the tumor response rate. Bone metastasis cases were excluded from the efficacy analysis, but were included in the safety population. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients registered in the study and the 2 patients with bone metastasis only were excluded from the efficacy analysis. The median follow-up period was 8. 3 months. None of the patients in the study had a CR, 4 had a PR(21. 1%), 9 had SD(47. 4%), and 6 had PD(31. 6%). Eight of the 9 SD cases had a long-term SD. The ORR was 21. 1% and the CB rate was 63. 2%. The median TTP of CB cases was 18. 3 months. None of the patients discontinued treatment because of a grade 3 or grade 4 adverse effects. CONCLUSION: In summary, the current study showed that HD-TOR may lead to a CB for recurrent breast cancer in first- or second-line treatment rather than thirdline. In particular, HD-TOR may give a benefit in highly endocrine-sensitive cases.

Granulosa cell tumor of the ovary after long-term use of tamoxifen and toremifene.

The relation between the use of tamoxifen and gynecologic tumors has been documented. In this case, a 58-year-old postmenopausal woman had been treated with tamoxifen for 5 years followed by toremifene for 1.5 years due to the presence of stage II estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. The patient was found to have a stage Ic granulosa cell tumor of the ovary despite undergoing annual gynecologic examinations. This report presents a case of granulosa cell tumor of the ovary after the long-term use of tamoxifen and toremifene.

[A study of the efficacy of high-dose toremifene in advanced and recurrent breast cancer].

Recently, many patients have been treated with aromatase inhibitors(AI), either in an adjuvant setting or as a treatment for recurrence. The efficacy and safety of high-dose toremifene(HD-TOR)were evaluated in 18 patients with advanced/recurrent breast cancer. Twelve of the 18 patients had received AI just prior to the study treatment. The clinical benefit rate was 56%(PR: 28%, long SD: 28%). Progression-free median survival was 5. 5 months. Adverse events were mild and toremifene was well-tolerated. The results suggest that HD-TOR should be considered early on as a second-line treatment, or as a later treatment option for AI-resistant breast cancer.

[Efficacy of high-dose toremifene as a second-line hormone therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitor].

BACKGROUND: Aromatase inhibitors(AIs)are frequently employed for advanced or metastatic postmenopausal breast cancer as first-line hormone therapy. However, it is unknown which hormonal agent is the most appropriate after AI has failed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hormone-responsive postmenopausal women who used AI as a first-line hormone therapy for advanced or metastatic breast cancer, but AI failed, received high-dose toremifene therapy(HD-TOR: 120mg/day)in our hospital. Efficacy and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: Patients were all-hormone sensitive, and only one case had HER2 overexpression. All patients had received anastrozole(ANA)as first-line hormone therapy. Of a total of 5 cases, 3 were evaluated as partial responses(PR), 1 was a long stable disease(L-SD), and 1 was a progressive disease(PD). The overall response rate (RR)was 60. 0%(3/5 cases)and the clinical benefit rate(CB)was 80. 0%(4/5 cases). Grade 1 dry mouth was observed in one case as an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: HD-TOR as a second-line therapy is optimal for advanced or metastatic AI resistance postmenopausal breast cancer.

[Regulation mechanism of breast cancer resistance protein by toremifene to reverse BCRP-mediated multidrug resistance in breast cancer cells].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the regulation mechanism of the reversal of breast cancer resistance protein-mediated multidrug resistance by toremifene. METHODS: Two recombinant plasmids (pcDNA3-promoter-BCRP and pcDNA3-CMV-BCRP) were designed to express the wild-type full-length BCRP cDNA enforced driven by its endogenous promoter containing a functional ERE and a CMV promoter as control, respectively. Two recombinant plasmids were transfected into ERα-positive MCF-7 and ERα-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell lines. Four kinds of BCRP expressing cell lines of MCF-7/Promoter-BCRP, MCF-7/CMV-BCRP, MDA-MB-231/Promoter-BCRP and MDA-MB-231/CMV-BCRP were established in which BCRP was promoted by the BCRP promoter and a CMV promoter as control, respectively. The drug resistant cells were treated with toremifene. Then RT-PCR, Western blot, mitoxantrone efflux assays and cytotoxicity assay were performed to detect the reversal function of BCRP by toremifene on the drug resistance cell lines. RESULTS: Toremifene significantly downregulated BCRP mRNA levels in a dose-dependent manner in ERα-positive MCF-7/Promoter-BCRP cells than that of untreated control cells. In MCF-7/Promoter-BCRP cells, toremifene at the dose of 0.1, 1 and 10 µmol/L decreased BCRP mRNA expression by 29.5% (P < 0.05), 68.1% (P < 0.01) and 97.4% (P < 0.01), respectively. After being treated with toremifene and 17ß-estradiol, the BCRP mRNA level in MCF-7/Promoter-BCRP cells was 64.2% ± 1.3%, significantly higher than that of toremifene treatment control cells (3.8% ± 0.2%,P < 0.01). Furthermore, the effect of toremifene on BCRP protein is similar in BCRP mRNA. Toremifene obviously increased the mitoxantrone fluorescence intensity and decreased the efflux activity by 47.3% (P < 0.05) in MCF-7/promoter-BCRP cells when compared with the untreated control, whereas intracellular accumulation of mitoxantrone obviously decreased and the efflux activity increased by 61.5% were observed in combination with 17ß-estradiol when compared with toremifene treatment alone. The results therefore suggested that toremifene reversed mitoxantrone resistance in MCF-7/Promoter-BCRP cells. However, in MCF-7/CMV-BCRP, MDA-MB-231/Promoter-BCRP and MDA-MB-231/CMV-BCRP cells, toremifene or in combination with 17ß-estradiol did not affect intracellular mitoxantrone uptake. CONCLUSION: Taken together, our findings indicate that expression of BCRP is downregulated by toremifene, via a novel transcriptional mechanism which might be involved in the ERE of BCRP promoter through ER-mediated to inactivate the transcription of BCRP gene.

[A retrospective study of high-dose toremifene treatment for patients with aromatase inhibitor refractory advanced or metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer].

Aromatase inhibitors (AI) have largely replaced tamoxifen as the first-line of treatment for postmenopausal women with advanced or metastatic hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. However, there is no established strategy for treating AI refractory cases. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of high-dose Toremifene therapy (HD-TOR). From January 2001 through April 2010, nineteen patients received 120 mg of TOR daily. The overall response rate was 36.8% (CR; 1, PR; 6), and the clinical benefit was 47.4%. The clinical benefit rate to each of the metastatic organs were: lung, 42.9%; bone, 13%; liver, 25%; and lymph node, 40%. A higher clinical benefit rate was observed in lung or lymph node metastases. The clinical benefit rate of HD-TOR as first to third-line therapy was 50%, which was more effective than that of fourth-line therapy. Our data suggests that HD-TOR may be one of the effective treatment strategies for patients with AI refractory advanced or metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

[The combined effect of Paclitaxel and toremifene therapy for estrogen receptor positive and aromatase inhibitor resistant metastatic breast cancer].

Multidrug resistance proteins such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp) are potential targets for improving the efficacy of paclitaxel (PTX), a mitotic inhibitor used in cancer chemotherapy. The selective estrogen receptor modulator toremifene (TOR) moderate P-gp was related to a drug resistance in vitro. A comparison of PTX alone with PTX+TOR in hormone-receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer patients (MBC) was conducted to determine the therapeutic value of adding TOR to a PTX regiment. Thirteen MBC patients received 80 mg/m2 PTX weekly (PTX group) and 14 MBC patients received the same weekly dose of PTX plus 120 mg/day TOR daily (PTX+TOR group). All 27 patients were repeatedly treated with a combination of PTX and TOR as long as disease progression or unmanageable severe adverse events were defined. The PTX group was compared with PTX+TOR group with respect to best overall response, response rate, clinical benefit rate, time to progression, adverse events and toxic profile of PTX and TOR. No significant difference in response rate was observed between the PTX group and the PTX+TOR group. However, clinical benefit rate and time to progression improved significantly in the PTX+TOR group in comparison with the PTX group. TOR did not significantly enhance the adverse events of PTX. These results suggested that combined treatment of PTX and TOR for MBC patients improves a patient response over PTX alone.

[Clinicopathological features of endometrial carcinoma in tamoxifen- and toremifene-treated breast cancer patients].

OBJECTIVE: Estrogen is involved in the development of breast and endometrial cancers, and tamoxifen, an antiestrogen, is associated with an increased risk of endometrial cancer. Recently, tamoxifen use is suggested to be associated with the development of aggressive endometrial tumors. We performed a retrospective study to clarify the effects of tamoxifen (TAM) and toremifene (TOR) on clinicopathological features of endometrial cancer subsequently developed in breast cancer patients. METHODS: Endometrial cancer patients diagnosed at our institution from 2000 through 2008 were studied. RESULTS: Of 194 patients with endometrial cancer, 18 (9.3%) developed breast cancer before endometrial cancer diagnosis. Mean age was 66 years, and the median time interval between breast and endometrial cancer diagnosis was 10 years (range, 1.5 -32 years). Nine patients developed aggressive tumors(serous, clear cell, small cell carcinoma, and carcinosarcoma), and the remaining nine developed endometrioid tumor. Patients with aggressive tumor had a lower 5-year disease-specific survival (0% vs 88%, p<0.01). Ten patients had used TAM and/or TOR, and six had not; aggressive tumors developed in six of 10 TAM/TOR users, and in one of six nonusers (p=0.15), and the 3-year disease-specific survival rate was not different between TAM/TOR users and nonusers (62% vs 53%, p=0.84). Time intervals from breast cancer and endometrial cancer diagnosis were 10-16 years for TAM users and 5-6 years for TOR users (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Tamoxifen/toremifene use for breast cancer did not affect the prognosis of subsequent endometrial cancer in our small study; however, further studies were warranted. The use of toremifene may be associated with a shorter interval from breast cancer to endometrial cancer diagnosis compared to tamoxifen.

Efficacy of everolimus combined with endocrine therapy in HR-positive/HER-2-negativeadvanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To explore the efficacy and safety of everolimus combined with endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)-negative advanced breast cancer. METHODS: The clinical information of 108 patients with HR-positive/HER-2-negative advanced breast cancer, who were admitted to and treated in our hospital from June 2014 to June 2016, was retrospectively analyzed. Of them, 54 patients were treated with everolimus combined with endocrine drugs (Everolimus group), while the other 54 patients underwent endocrine monotherapy (Control group). The clinical response rate and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups of patients, and the patients were followed up to record survival. Besides, the possible influencing factors for progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. RESULTS: The objective response rate (ORR) was 22.2% and 14.8%, respectively, in everolimus group and the Control group, while the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 66.7% and 37.0%, respectively, in the two groups. There were statistically significant differences in the CBRs of the first-line and second-line therapies. The majority of adverse reactions were in grade I and II, with lower incidence rates of grade III and IV adverse reactions. The median PFS of the two groups of patients was 7.3±5.6 months and 6.7±5.1 months, respectively. The log-rank test revealed that there was a statistically significant difference in the PFS between the two groups of patients. According to the multivariate regression analysis results, progesterone receptor (PR)+, absence of visceral metastases, and sensitivity to endocrine therapy were the protective prognostic factors for PFS. CONCLUSION: Everolimus combined with endocrine therapy has significant clinical efficacy in patients with HR-positive/HER-2-negative advanced breast cancer, and can effectively improve the survival of patients with tolerable adverse reactions. PR+, absence of visceral metastases and sensitivity to endocrine therapy are the protective prognostic factors for PFS.

Efficacy and tolerability of weekly paclitaxel in combination with high-dose toremifene citrate in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Toremifene citrate is expected to prevent drug resistance in cancer patients by inhibiting p-glycoprotein activity. The safety and efficacy of combination therapy with high-dose toremifene citrate and paclitaxel were investigated. Between December 2003 and June 2004, 15 women with a mean age of 53 years old with metastatic breast cancer were enrolled. The administration schedule was 80 mg/m2 of paclitaxel given on Days 1, 8, and 15, and 120 mg/day of toremifene citrate orally administered starting on Day 18. On Days 32 and 39, paclitaxel was concurrently administered again. Toxicities, response rate, and time to treatment failure were assessed. All patients had been treated with endocrine or chemotherapy. Grade 3 leukopenia occurred in 2 patients on the administration of paclitaxel alone, and grade 3 febrile neutropenia occurred in 1 patient given the combination therapy. There was no grade 3 or greater non-hematological toxicity. There was no complete response and 1 partial response, producing a response rate of 6.7%. Median time to treatment failure was 2.7 months. Combination therapy of paclitaxel and toremifene was safe and well tolerated with minimal toxicity. Further clinical trials targeting patients with functional p-glycoprotein are warranted.

[The combined effect of paclitaxel and toremifene therapy for metastatic breast cancer].

A comparison of paclitaxel (PTX) alone with PTX+toremifene (TOR) in hormone receptor negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients was conducted to determine the therapeutic value of adding TOR to a PTX regimen. Eight MBC patients received 80 mg/m2 PTX weekly (PTX group) and six MBC patients received the same weekly dose of PTX plus 120 mg/day TOR daily (PTX+TOR group). Patients were repeatedly treated with a combination of PTX and TOR as long as a disease progression or unmanageable severe adverse events were defined. The PTX group was compared with the PTX+TOR group with respect to best overall response, response rate, clinical benefit rate, time to progression, adverse events and toxic profile of PTX and TOR. No significant difference in response rate was observed between the PTX group and the PTX+TOR group. However, a clinical benefit rate and time to progression improved significantly in the PTX+TOR group in comparison with the PTX group. TOR did not significantly enhance the adverse events of PTX. These results suggested that the combined treatment of PTX and TOR for MBC patients improved a patient response over PTX alone.

[Efficacy of treatment with high-dose toremifene in patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitor treatment].

The efficacy of aromatase inhibitors(AI)has been established for adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer. However, decision making regarding treatment becomes difficult after AI treatment. Recently, high-dose toremifene(HD-TOR, TOR 120 mg daily)showed efficacy in these patients. We attempted to study retrospectively the efficacy and safety of HD-TOR treatment. Seven patients received HD-TOR. The overall response rate was 29%(PR 2)and clinical benefit (CR, PR, long SD)was 57%(PR 2, long SD 7). HD-TOR may be an optional treatment for MBC after AI treatment.

[A case of advanced breast cancer with multiple bone metastases responding to docetaxel and high-dose toremifene as fourth-line chemo-endocrine therapy].

A 55-year old woman, who underwent left mastectomy (Bt+Ax), was revealed to have sternum metastasis by postoperative 99mTc bone scanning(T1bN1M1). She received daily aromatase inhibitor (anastrozole), as a primary systemic endocrine therapy, and biweekly pamidronate for metastatic breast cancer. However, she depended on folk medicine a year later, at which time the primary treatment was discontinued. Another year later, the bone metastases developed with increased serum levels of tumor markers (CEA, CA19-9, and NCC-ST-439). Then, she underwent three different regimens of systemic chemo-endocrine therapy over the following three years, including CAF+MPA as the first-line, paclitaxel (PTX) + anastrozole as the second-line, and S-1+anastrozole as the third-line regimen. She recently completed 10 courses of the fourth-line regimen[tri-weekly docetaxel (DOC) and high-dose toremifene (TOR 120 mg/day)], which reduced levels of 99mTc accumulation in the multiple bone metastases and levels of the serum tumor markers to the normal range. No severe adverse events occurred except peripheral thrombovasculitis (grade 2) in her left anterior arm during the fourth regimen. She recently maintains the current status by taking a regular dose (40 mg/day) of toremifene for 5 months. Combination treatment with DOC and high-dose TOR can be one of the worthwhile regimens as systemic chemo-endocrine therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer who develop bone metastases.

[Efficacy and safety of high-dose toremifene for hormone-responsive advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients with failed prior treatment by aromatase inhibitors].

BACKGROUND: Recently, aromatase inhibitors (AI) are widely used in postoperative adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Nevertheless, studies of postoperative therapeutic strategies for recurrent breast cancer are insufficient. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Data on 12 post-menopausal advanced/recurrent breast cancer patients in our department during June 2003- April 2007 were used for this study. No patient had responded to high-dose toremifene (TOR), a third-generation AI. Their therapeutic outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. The median observation period of the subjects was 16.1 months (4.0-40.9 months). Subjects were all hormone-sensitive. Overexpression of HER2 protein was found in only one case. During AI therapy immediately prior, exemestane (EXE) and anastrozole (ANA) had been given in nine and three cases, respectively. RESULTS: The complete response rate of AI therapy was 16.7% (2/12). The clinical benefit rate was 58.3% (7/12). The median of time to progression (TTP) was 33.8 weeks. Neither the presence nor absence of past history of treatment with tamoxifen (TAM) or other chemotherapies affected the anti-tumor effect. Analysis by the site of metastasis or recurrence revealed that the therapeutic effects were better for non-life-threatening cases in the lung, pleura, soft tissue, etc. The severities of adverse effects were all less than grade 2; the major ones were flushing and sweating. CONCLUSION: Results show that high-dose TOR given at an early stage can provide clinical benefits for post-menopausal advanced/recurrent breast cancer not responding to AI.