Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel Versus Epirubicin Plus Docetaxel Followed by Capecitabine As Adjuvant Therapy for Node-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Results From the GEICAM/2003-10 Study.

PURPOSE: Capecitabine is an active drug in metastatic breast cancer (BC). GEICAM/2003-10 is an adjuvant trial to investigate the integration of capecitabine into a regimen of epirubicin and docetaxel for node-positive early BC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with operable node-positive BC (T1-3/N1-3) were eligible. After surgery, 1,384 patients were randomly assigned to receive epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC; 90 and 600 mg/m(2), respectively, × four cycles), followed by docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) × four cycles; EC-T) or epirubicin plus docetaxel (ET; 90 and 75 mg/m(2), respectively, × four cycles), followed by capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) twice a day on days 1 to 14, × four cycles; ET-X); all regimens were given every 3 weeks. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival. Secondary end points included safety (with an alopecia-specific study) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 6.6 years and 297 events, 86% of patients who received EC-T and 82% of those who received ET-X were invasive disease free at 5 years (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.64; log-rank P = .03). The OS difference between arms was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.55; log-rank P = .46). The most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the EC-T versus ET-X arms were neutropenia (19% v 10%), with 7% febrile neutropenia across arms; fatigue (13% v 11%); diarrhea (3% v 11%); hand-foot syndrome (2% v 20%); mucositis (6% v 5%); vomiting (both, 5%); and myalgia (4.5% v 1%). Incomplete scalp hair recovery was more frequent in the EC-T than ET-X arm (30% v 14%), and patients who received EC-T wore wigs significantly longer than those who received ET-X (8.35 v 6.03 months). CONCLUSION: Invasive disease-free survival, but not OS, was significantly superior for patients with node-positive early BC who received the adjuvant standard schedule EC-T than for those who received the experimental ET-X regimen. Toxicity profiles differed substantially across arms.

Clinical validation of the EndoPredict test in node-positive, chemotherapy-treated ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients: results from the GEICAM 9906 trial.

INTRODUCTION: EndoPredict (EP) is an RNA-based multigene test that predicts the likelihood of distant recurrence in patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) who are being treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy. Herein we report the prospective-retrospective clinical validation of EP in the node-positive, chemotherapy-treated, ER+/HER2- BC patients in the GEICAM 9906 trial. METHODS: The patients (N = 1,246) were treated either with six cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or with four cycles of FEC followed by eight weekly courses of paclitaxel (FEC-P), as well as with endocrine therapy if they had hormone receptor-positive disease. The patients were assigned to EP risk categories (low or high) according to prespecified cutoff levels. The primary endpoint in the clinical validation of EP was distant metastasis-free survival (MFS). Metastasis rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate analysis was performed using Cox regression. RESULTS: The molecular EP score and the combined molecular and clinical EPclin score were successfully determined in 555 ER+/HER2- tumors from the 800 available samples in the GEICAM 9906 trial. On the basis of the EP, 25% of patients (n = 141) were classified as low risk. MFS was 93% in the low-risk group and 70% in the high-risk group (absolute risk reduction = 23%, hazard ratio (HR) = 4.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.5 to 9.5; P < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that, in this ER+/HER2- cohort, EP results are an independent prognostic parameter after adjustment for age, grade, lymph node status, tumor size, treatment arm, ER and progesterone receptor (PR) status and proliferation index (Ki67). Using the predefined EPclin score, 13% of patients (n = 74) were assigned to the low-risk group, who had excellent outcomes and no distant recurrence events (absolute risk reduction vs high-risk group = 28%; P < 0.0001). Furthermore, EP was prognostic in premenopausal patients (HR = 6.7, 95% CI = 2.4 to 18.3; P = 0.0002) and postmenopausal patients (HR = 3.3, 95% CI = 1.3 to 8.5; P = 0.0109). There were no statistically significant differences in MFS between treatment arms (FEC vs FEC-P) in either the high- or low-risk groups. The interaction test results between the chemotherapy arm and the EP score were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: EP is an independent prognostic parameter in node-positive, ER+/HER2- BC patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy followed by hormone therapy. EP did not predict a greater efficacy of FEC-P compared to FEC alone.

Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) versus FAC followed by weekly paclitaxel as adjuvant therapy for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer: results from the GEICAM/2003-02 study.

PURPOSE: Adding taxanes to anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy improves survival outcomes of patients with node-positive breast cancer (BC). Currently, however, most patients with BC are node negative at diagnosis. The only pure node-negative study (Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group 9805) reported so far showed a docetaxel benefit but significant toxicity. Here we tested the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel (wP) in node-negative patients, which is yet to be established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with BC having T1-T3/N0 tumors and at least one high-risk factor for recurrence (according to St. Gallen 1998 criteria) were eligible. After primary surgery, 1,925 patients were randomly assigned to receive fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) × 6 or FAC × 4 followed by wP × 8 (FAC-wP). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) after a median follow-up of 5 years. Secondary end points included toxicity and overall survival. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 63.3 months, 93% and 90.3% of patients receiving FAC-wP or FAC regimens, respectively, remained disease free (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.99; log-rank P = .04). Thirty-one patients receiving FAC-wP versus 40 patients receiving FAC died (one and seven from cardiovascular diseases, respectively; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.26; log-rank P = .31). The most relevant grade 3 and 4 adverse events in the FAC-wP versus the FAC arm were febrile neutropenia (2.7% v 3.6%), fatigue (7.9% v 3.4%), and sensory neuropathy (5.5% v 0%). CONCLUSION: For patients with high-risk node-negative BC, the adjuvant FAC-wP regimen was associated with a small but significant improvement in DFS compared with FAC therapy, in addition to manageable toxicity, especially regarding long-term cardiac effects.

PAM50 proliferation score as a predictor of weekly paclitaxel benefit in breast cancer.

To identify a group of patients who might benefit from the addition of weekly paclitaxel to conventional anthracycline-containing chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy of node-positive operable breast cancer. The predictive value of PAM50 subtypes and the 11-gene proliferation score contained within the PAM50 assay were evaluated in 820 patients from the GEICAM/9906 randomized phase III trial comparing adjuvant FEC to FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P). Multivariable Cox regression analyses of the secondary endpoint of overall survival (OS) were performed to determine the significance of the interaction between treatment and the (1) PAM50 subtypes, (2) PAM50 proliferation score, and (3) clinical and pathological variables. Similar OS analyses were performed in 222 patients treated with weekly paclitaxel versus paclitaxel every 3 weeks in the CALGB/9342 and 9840 metastatic clinical trials. In GEICAM/9906, with a median follow up of 8.7 years, OS of the FEC-P arm was significantly superior compared to the FEC arm (unadjusted HR = 0.693, p = 0.013). A benefit from paclitaxel was only observed in the group of patients with a low PAM50 proliferation score (unadjusted HR = 0.23, p < 0.001; and interaction test, p = 0.006). No significant interactions between treatment and the PAM50 subtypes or the various clinical-pathological variables, including Ki-67 and histologic grade, were identified. Finally, similar OS results were obtained in the CALGB data set, although the interaction test did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.109). The PAM50 proliferation score identifies a subset of patients with a low proliferation status that may derive a larger benefit from weekly paclitaxel.

Adjuvant docetaxel for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: A regimen of docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) is superior to a regimen of fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) when used as adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive breast cancer. The value of taxanes in the treatment of node-negative disease has not been determined. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1060 women with axillary-node-negative breast cancer and at least one high-risk factor for recurrence (according to the 1998 St. Gallen criteria) to treatment with TAC or FAC every 3 weeks for six cycles after surgery. The primary end point was disease-free survival after at least 5 years of follow-up. Secondary end points included overall survival and toxicity. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 77 months, the proportion of patients alive and disease-free was higher among the 539 women in the TAC group (87.8%) than among the 521 women in the FAC group (81.8%), representing a 32% reduction in the risk of recurrence with TAC (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.93; P=0.01 by the log-rank test). This benefit was consistent, regardless of hormone-receptor status, menopausal status, or number of high-risk factors. The difference in survival rates (TAC, 95.2%; FAC, 93.5%) was not significant (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.26); however, the number of events was small (TAC, 26; FAC, 34). Rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 28.2% with TAC and 17.0% with FAC (P<0.001). Toxicity associated with TAC was diminished when primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was provided. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with adjuvant FAC, adjuvant TAC improved the rate of disease-free survival among women with high-risk, node-negative breast cancer. (Funded by GEICAM and Sanofi-Aventis; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00121992.).

Molecular predictors of efficacy of adjuvant weekly paclitaxel in early breast cancer.

UNLABELLED: Treatment with fluororacil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P) yielded superior disease-free survival than FEC in the adjuvant breast cancer trial GEICAM 9906. We evaluate molecular subtypes predictive of prognosis and paclitaxel response in this trial. Two molecular subtype classifications based on conventional immunohistochemical and fluorescent in situ hybridization determinations were used: #1: Four groups segregated according to the combination of hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status; #2: Intrinsic subtype classification (Triple Negative (TN), HER2, Luminal B and Luminal A). RESULTS: Both subtype classifications yielded prognostic and predictive information. HR +/HER2- patients (and Luminal A patients) had a significantly better outcome than the other subgroups of patients. The superiority of FEC-P over FEC was clearly more marked in HR-/HER2- patients (TN patients), particularly in the subset with basal phenotype (TN and either EGFR+ or cytokeratins 5/6+). The Luminal A subtype also achieved a significant benefit with FEC-P. The molecular-defined subgroup of TN was clearly predictive of better response to treatment with FEC-P. Luminal A patients had the best prognosis and also have a better outcome with weekly paclitaxel.

Randomized phase 3 trial of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide alone or followed by Paclitaxel for early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Taxanes are among the most active drugs for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and, as a consequence, they have also been studied in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: After breast cancer surgery, women with lymph node-positive disease were randomly assigned to treatment with fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or with FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P). The primary endpoint of study-5-year disease-free survival (DFS)-was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and analysis of the prognostic and predictive value of clinical and molecular (hormone receptors by immunohistochemistry and HER2 by fluorescence in situ hybridization) markers. Associations and interactions were assessed with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model for DFS for the following covariates: age, menopausal status, tumor size, lymph node status, type of chemotherapy, tumor size, positive lymph nodes, HER2 status, and hormone receptor status. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Among the 1246 eligible patients, estimated rates of DFS at 5 years were 78.5% in the FEC-P arm and 72.1% in the FEC arm (difference = 6.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6% to 11.2%; P = .006). FEC-P treatment was associated with a 23% reduction in the risk of relapse compared with FEC treatment (146 relapses in the 614 patients in the FEC-P arm vs 193 relapses in the 632 patients in the FEC arm, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.95; P = .022) and a 22% reduction in the risk of death (73 and 95 deaths, respectively, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.06; P = .110). Among the 928 patients for whom tumor samples were centrally analyzed, type of chemotherapy (FEC vs FEC-P) (P = .017), number of involved axillary lymph nodes (P < .001), tumor size (P = .020), hormone receptor status (P = .004), and HER2 status (P = .006) were all associated with DFS. We found no statistically significant interaction between HER2 status and paclitaxel treatment or between hormone receptor status and paclitaxel treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with operable breast cancer, FEC-P treatment statistically significantly reduced the risk of relapse compared with FEC as adjuvant therapy.