Survival after adding capecitabine and trastuzumab to neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy for primary breast cancer (GBG 40--GeparQuattro).

BACKGROUND: The GeparQuattro study showed that adding capecitabine or prolonging the duration of anthracycline-taxane-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 24 to 36 weeks did not increase pathological complete response (pCR) rates. Trastuzumab-treated patients with HER2-positive disease showed a higher pCR rate than patients with HER2-negative disease treated with chemotherapy alone. We here present disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) analyses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 1495) with cT ≥ 3 tumors, or negative hormone-receptor status, or positive hormone-receptor and clinically node-positive disease received four times epirubicin/cyclophosphamide and were thereafter randomly assigned to four times docetaxel (Taxotere), or four times docetaxel/capecitabine over 24 weeks, or four times docetaxel followed by capecitabine over 36 weeks. Patients with HER2-positive tumors received 1 year of trastuzumab, starting with the first chemotherapy cycle. Follow-up was available for a median of 5.4 years. RESULTS: Outcome was not improved for patients receiving capecitabine (HR 0.92; P = 0.463 for DFS and HR 93; P = 0.618 for OS) as well as for patients receiving 36 weeks of chemotherapy (HR 0.97; P = 0.818 for DFS and HR 0.97; P = 0.825 for OS). Trastuzumab-treated patients with HER2-positive disease showed similar DFS (P = 0.305) but a significantly better adjusted OS (P = 0.040) when compared with patients with HER2-negative disease treated with chemotherapy alone. Recorded long-term cardiac toxicity was low. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results, similar to the results of pCR, do not support the use of capecitabine in the neoadjuvant setting in addition to an anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy. However, the results support previous data showing a benefit of trastuzumab as predicted by higher pCR rates.

PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative, dose-dense, dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel ± darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer--results at the time of surgery.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemotherapy is a recommended treatment of both primary operable and locally advanced breast cancer. Strategies to improve efficacy include the use of anthracyclines, taxanes, and intensified dose with bone marrow support. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received neoadjuvant epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) (EC→T), each 3-weekly for four cycles (n = 370), or epirubicin 150 mg/m(2) followed by paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) with pegfilgrastim followed by CMF (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2), methotrexate 40 mg/m(2), fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 (E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF), each 2-weekly and for three cycles (n = 363). Patients were randomly allocated to either simultaneous darbepoetin alfa (DA) (n = 356) or none (n = 377). RESULTS: Pathological complete response (pCR) rate (breast) was higher with E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF, 18.7% versus 13.2% with EC→T; P = 0.043, ypT0/Tis; ypN0 was reported in 20.9% versus 14.3% respectively; P = 0.019. Patients with grade 3 tumors and negative hormone receptor status had a significantly higher pCR rate. Mean hemoglobin values maintained higher with DA (13.6 versus 12.6 g/dl). E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF regimen showed more grade 3-4 mucositis, sensory neuropathy, and neurological complaints. Thromboembolic events were more frequent on DA (3% versus 6%; P = 0.055). CONCLUSION: Dose-dense and -intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF was potentially superior to EC→T in terms of pCR. Primary use of DA did not affect pCR.

PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative, dose-dense, dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with or without darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer--outcome on prognosis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the effect of dose-intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with that of standard epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel in combination with or without darbepoetin on survival in primary breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 733 patients received either four cycles of neoadjuvant epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks followed by four cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (EC→T), or three cycles of epirubicin 150 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF). The patients were randomly assigned to receive darbepoetin or none. The primary objective was to demonstrate a superior disease-free survival (DFS) of E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF compared with EC→T. RESULTS: Estimated 3-year DFS was 75.8% with EC→T versus 78.8% with E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF [hazard ratio (HR) 1.14; P = 0.37] and overall survival (OS) 88.4% versus 91.5% (HR 1.26; P = 0.237). Three-year DFS was 74.3% with darbepoetin versus 80.0% without (HR 1.31; P = 0.061) and OS 88.0% versus 91.8% (HR 1.33; P = 0.139). Patients with a pathologically documented complete response [pathological complete response (pCR)] had a significantly better DFS compared with those without achieving a pCR (estimated 3-year DFS: 89.2% versus 74.9%; HR 2.27; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant dose-intensified chemotherapy compared with standard chemotherapy did not improve DFS, whereas the addition of darbepoetin might have detrimental effects on DFS.

Comparison of different approaches for assessment of HER2 expression on protein and mRNA level: prediction of chemotherapy response in the neoadjuvant GeparTrio trial (NCT00544765).

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing is an essential part of pathological assessment in breast cancer patients, as HER2 provides not only prognostic but also predictive information on response to targeted therapy. So far, HER2 test accuracy of immunohistochemistry/in situ-hybridization techniques is still under debate, and more reliable and robust technologies are needed. To address this issue and to evaluate the predictive value of HER2 on chemotherapy, we investigated a cohort of 278 patients from the GeparTrio trial, a prospective neoadjuvant anthracycline/taxane-based multicenter study. In the GeparTrio trial, patients were not treated with any anti-HER2 therapy, as this was not standard therapy at this time. The HER2 status was analyzed by three different approaches: local and central evaluation using immunohistochemistry combined with in situ-hybridization as well as evaluation of HER2 mRNA expression using kinetic RT-PCR from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples using a predefined cutoff. HER2 overexpression/amplification was observed in 37.3% (91/244) and 17.9% (41/229) of the informative samples in the local and central evaluations, respectively. Positive HER2 mRNA levels were found in 19.8% (55/278). We observed a highly significant correlation between central HER2 expression and HER2 status measured by kinetic RT-PCR (r = 0.856, P < 0.0001) and an overall agreement of 95.6% (κ statistic, 0.862, CI 0.77-0.94). Further, central HER2 as well as HER2 mRNA expression were predictors for a pathological complete response after neoadjuvant anthracycline/taxane-based primary chemotherapy in a univariate binary logistic regression analysis (OR 3.29, P = 0.002; OR 2.65, P = 0.004). The predictive value could be confirmed for the central HER2 status by multivariate analysis (OR 3.04, P = 0.027). The locally assessed HER2 status was not predictive of response to chemotherapy. Our results suggest that standardized methods are preferable for evaluation of HER2 status. The kinetic RT-PCR from FFPE tissue might be an additional approach for assessment of this important prognostic and predictive parameter but has to be confirmed by other studies.

Management of menopausal symptoms in breast cancer patients.

In breast cancer patients, menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes, urogenital problems, musculoskeletal symptoms and cognitive dysfunction are common, regardless of age at diagnosis. They affect quality of life and systemic therapy will worsen this. Endocrine and/or chemotherapy may induce temporary or permanent ovarian failure and can exacerbate these symptoms. Hormone therapy (HT) has been studied in breast cancer survivors, but safety has been questioned. The HABITS trial investigating estrogen-based HT, as well as the LIBERATE trial investigating tibolone, found a reduction in disease-free survival for those treated. Alternative strategies are needed, as menopause symptoms may reduce compliance with breast cancer treatments. This article reviews recently published strategies to tackle menopausal problems in breast cancer patients. Antidepressants may help with hot flashes. Acupuncture and hypnosis can also be used but the evidence is conflicting. For urogenital problems vaginal moisturizers or topical estrogens can be employed. A musculoskeletal syndrome induced by aromatase inhibitors (AIs) is frequently encountered and currently there are no effective treatment strategies. Bisphosphonates reduce AI-induced bone resorption and can also increase disease-free and overall survival. Standard-dose endocrine and chemotherapy are associated with a decline in cognitive function.

Bendamustine prolongs progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (MBC): a phase III prospective, randomized, multicenter trial of bendamustine hydrochloride, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (BMF) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) as first-line treatment of MBC.

Two i.v. regimens, bendamustine, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (BMF) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) were compared as first-line therapy in a randomized, open, multicenter phase III trial including 364 patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Bendamustine is an anti-neoplastic agent with alkylating, but also additional, so far unclear, mechanisms of action. We wanted to show the superiority of BMF over CMF in terms of time to progression (TTP) (primary endpoint), overall response, response duration, toxicity and quality of life (QoL). TTP was significantly longer in the BMF group (8.2 versus 6.7 months for CMF) (p=0.0071). The effect of BMF on TTP was more pronounced in the stratum 'prior adjuvant therapy, no visceral metastases' (p=0.034). Overall response rates and QoL did not significantly differ between the regimens. BMF caused more mucositis and leukopenias. Thus, bendamustine, when replacing cyclophosphamide in the CMF combination, can be expected to produce longer progression-free survival in first-line treatment of MBC.

Phase I/II study of capecitabine and vinorelbine in pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To define the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of the combination of capecitabine and vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer who relapse after adjuvant and/or first-line treatment. In addition, we aimed to obtain data on efficacy and safety at the recommended dose. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable metastatic breast cancer after failure of prior chemotherapy (including anthracyclines and/or taxanes) were eligible. Capecitabine was administered with a fixed dose of 1000 mg/m(2) orally twice daily for 2 weeks followed by 1 week rest. One treatment cycle consisted of 6 weeks of treatment containing two treatment periods of capecitabine. Vinorelbine was given intravenously at escalated doses of 25 mg/m(2) (dose level 1) and 30 mg/m(2) (dose level 2) on days 1 and 8, and 22 and 29. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients received a total of 91 cycles of capecitabine and vinorelbine. The median number of administered cycles per patient was three (range one to six). Thirty-one patients were evaluable for toxicity. At dose level 2 four out of seven patients experienced DLTs (nausea/vomiting, febrile neutropenia, grade 4 neutropenia, infection and diarrhea); thus, the MTD was defined. In order to confirm the safety and efficacy, dose level 1 was extended to 24 patients. Two patients [8.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1% to 27%] showed DLTs (hospitalization due to febrile neutropenia and prolonged neutropenia). The main toxicity was neutropenia, which was observed at National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3 and 4 in 39% of patients. The overall response rate for capecitabine and vinorelbine was 55% (95% CI 36% to 72.7%), including three patients with a complete remission. The median time to disease progression was 8 months (95% CI 4.3-11.7) with an overall survival of 19.2 months (95% CI 11.3-27.1) based on intention-to-treat analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of capecitabine and vinorelbine can be administered with manageable toxicity and showed significant efficacy for patients with metastatic breast cancer even after failure of a anthracycline- and/or taxane-based therapy.