Detailed Sub-study Analysis of the SECRAB Trial: Quality of Life, Cosmesis and Chemotherapy Dose Intensity.

AIMS: SECRAB was a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised phase III trial comparing synchronous to sequential chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Conducted in 48 UK centres, it recruited 2297 patients (1150 synchronous and 1146 sequential) between 2 July 1998 and 25 March 2004. SECRAB reported a positive therapeutic benefit of using adjuvant synchronous CRT in the management of breast cancer; 10-year local recurrence rates reduced from 7.1% to 4.6% (P = 0.012). The greatest benefit was seen in patients treated with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) rather than CMF. The aim of its sub-studies reported here was to assess whether quality of life (QoL), cosmesis or chemotherapy dose intensity differed between the two CRT regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The QoL sub-study used EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BR23 and the Women's Health Questionnaire. Cosmesis was assessed: (i) by the treating clinician, (ii) by a validated independent consensus scoring method and (iii) from the patients' perspective by analysing four cosmesis-related QoL questions within the QLQ-BR23. Chemotherapy doses were captured from pharmacy records. The sub-studies were not formally powered; rather, the aim was that at least 300 patients (150 in each arm) were recruited and differences in QoL, cosmesis and dose intensity of chemotherapy assessed. The analysis, therefore, is exploratory in nature. RESULTS: No differences were observed in the change from baseline in QoL between the two arms assessed up to 2 years post-surgery (Global Health Status: -0.05; 95% confidence interval -2.16, 2.06; P = 0.963). No differences in cosmesis were observed (via independent and patient assessment) up to 5 years post-surgery. The percentage of patients receiving the optimal course-delivered dose intensity (≥85%) was not significantly different between the arms (synchronous 88% versus sequential 90%; P = 0.503). CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous CRT is tolerable, deliverable and significantly more effective than sequential, with no serious disadvantages identified when assessing 2-year QoL or 5-year cosmetic differences.

Adjuvant epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF) vs CMF in early breast cancer: results with over 7 years median follow-up from the randomised phase III NEAT/BR9601 trials.

BACKGROUND: The National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial (NEAT) and BR9601 trials tested the benefit of epirubicin when added to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (E-CMF) compared with standard CMF in adjuvant chemotherapy for women with early breast cancer. This report details longer follow-up with interesting additional time-dependent analyses. METHODS: National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial used epirubicin (E) 3-weekly for four cycles followed by classical (c) CMF for four cycles (E-CMF) compared with cCMF for six cycles. BR9601 used E 3-weekly for four cycles followed by CMF 3-weekly for four cycles, compared with CMF 3-weekly for eight cycles. RESULTS: In all, 2391 eligible patients were randomised and with a median 7.4-year follow-up, E-CMF confirmed a significant benefit over CMF in both relapse-free survival (RFS) (78% vs 71% 5 years RFS, respectively, hazard ratio (HR)=0.75 (95% CI: 0.65-0.86), P<0.0001) and overall survival (OS) (84% vs 78% 5 years OS, respectively, HR=0.76 (95% CI: 0.65-0.89), P=0.0007). Interaction of treatment effect and prognostic factors was demonstrated for duplication of chromosome 17 centromeric enumeration (Ch17CEP) as previously reported. Poor prognostic factors at diagnosis (ER and PR negative and HER2 positive) showed time-dependent annual hazard rates for RFS and OS. In univariate analysis, these factors demonstrated more favourable HRs for RFS after 5 years. Treatment effects also suggested a differential benefit for E-CMF within the first 5 years for poor prognosis tumours. CONCLUSION: Longer follow-up has confirmed E-CMF as significantly superior to CMF for all patients. Ch17CEP duplication was the only biomarker that demonstrated significant treatment interaction. Standard poor prognostic factors at diagnosis were time-dependent, and after 5 years disease-free, poor prognosis patients demonstrated favourable HRs for survival.

NEAT: National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial--toxicity, delivered dose intensity and quality of life.

The NEAT trial reported considerable benefit for ECMF (epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil) of 28% for relapse-free survival (RFS) and 30% for overall survival (OS), when compared with classical CMF in early breast cancer. To assess tolerability, toxicity, dose intensity and quality of life (QoL) analyses were undertaken. All 2021 eligible patients had common toxicity criteria (CTC), delivered chemotherapy and supportive treatments details and long-term morbidities recorded. The QoL substudy used multiple validated measures. ECMF produced low CTC scores, although higher than CMF for nausea, vomiting, alopecia, constipation, stomatitis (P<0.001), infection (P=0.001) and fatigue (P=0.03). Supportive treatments required, however, were similar across randomised treatments. On-treatment deaths were more common with CMF (13) than ECMF(5). Optimal course-delivered dose intensity (CDDI > or =85%) was received more often by ECMF patients (83 vs 76%: P=0.0002), and was associated with better RFS (P=0.0006). QoL over 2 years was equivalent across treatments, despite minimally worse side effects for ECMF during treatment. ECMF benefit spanned all levels of toxicity, CDDI and QoL. There are no reported acute myeloid leukaemias or cardiac dysfunctions. ECMF is tolerable, deliverable, and significantly more effective than CMF, with no serious long-term toxicity or QoL detriment.