Can we abandon anthracyclines for early breast cancer patients?

Anthracycline-containing regimens improve disease-free and overall survival of patients with early breast cancer, but the toxicity, especially the cardiotoxicity, of the anthracyclines make them unattractive in the adjuvant setting. Two large, randomized trials, one in unselected patients and one in those with HER2-positive tumors, suggest that a taxane combination without an anthracycline might be just as effective as more traditional regimens. These and other studies also suggest that the anthracyclines might reasonably be used only for those with more aggressive forms of breast cancer, as defined by molecular markers. The results of these studies are provocative but insufficient to justify the conclusion that anthracyclines can be either abandoned or used only for a very select group of patients.

Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen is standard adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. We assessed the benefit of adding chemotherapy to adjuvant tamoxifen and whether tamoxifen should be given concurrently or after chemotherapy. METHODS: We undertook a phase 3, parallel, randomised trial (SWOG-8814, INT-0100) in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer to test two major objectives: whether the primary outcome, disease-free survival, was longer with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) given every 4 weeks for six cycles plus 5 years of daily tamoxifen than with tamoxifen alone; and whether disease-free survival was longer with CAF followed by tamoxifen (CAF-T) than with CAF plus concurrent tamoxifen (CAFT). Overall survival and toxicity were predefined, important secondary outcomes for each objective. Patients in this open-label trial were randomly assigned by a computer algorithm in a 2:3:3 ratio (tamoxifen:CAF-T:CAFT) and analysis was by intention to treat of eligible patients. Groups were compared by stratified log-rank tests, followed by Cox regression analyses adjusted for significant prognostic factors. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00929591. FINDINGS: Of 1558 randomised women, 1477 (95%) were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. After a maximum of 13 years of follow-up (median 8.94 years), 637 women had a disease-free survival event (tamoxifen, 179 events in 361 patients; CAF-T, 216 events in 566 patients; CAFT, 242 events in 550 patients). For the first objective, therapy with the CAF plus tamoxifen groups combined (CAFT or CAF-T) was superior to tamoxifen alone for the primary endpoint of disease-free survival (adjusted Cox regression hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91; p=0.002) but only marginally for the secondary endpoint of overall survival (HR 0.83, 0.68-1.01; p=0.057). For the second objective, the adjusted HRs favoured CAF-T over CAFT but did not reach significance for disease-free survival (HR 0.84, 0.70-1.01; p=0.061) or overall survival (HR 0.90, 0.73-1.10; p=0.30). Neutropenia, stomatitis, thromboembolism, congestive heart failure, and leukaemia were more frequent in the combined CAF plus tamoxifen groups than in the tamoxifen-alone group. INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy with CAF plus tamoxifen given sequentially is more effective adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer than is tamoxifen alone. However, it might be possible to identify some subgroups that do not benefit from anthracycline-based chemotherapy despite positive nodes. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute (US National Institutes of Health).

HER2 and response to paclitaxel in node-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The status of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) in breast-cancer cells predicts clinical outcomes in women who receive adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy. We hypothesized that HER2 positivity predicts a benefit from adjuvant doxorubicin doses above standard levels, from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, or from both. METHODS: We randomly selected 1500 women from 3121 women with node-positive breast cancer who had been randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin (60, 75, or 90 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus cyclophosphamide (600 mg per square meter) for four cycles, followed by four cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter) or observation. Tissue blocks from 1322 of these 1500 women were available. Immunohistochemical analyses of these tissue specimens for HER2 with the CB11 monoclonal antibody against HER2 or with a polyclonal-antibody assay kit and fluorescence in situ hybridization for HER2 amplification were performed. RESULTS: No interaction was observed between HER2 positivity and doxorubicin doses above 60 mg per square meter. HER2 positivity was, however, associated with a significant benefit from paclitaxel. The interaction between HER2 positivity and the addition of paclitaxel to the treatment was associated with a hazard ratio for recurrence of 0.59 (P=0.01). Patients with a HER2-positive breast cancer benefited from paclitaxel, regardless of estrogen-receptor status, but paclitaxel did not benefit patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive cancers. CONCLUSIONS: The expression or amplification, or both, of HER2 by a breast cancer is associated with a benefit from the addition of paclitaxel after adjuvant treatment with doxorubicin (<60 mg per square meter) plus cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer, regardless of estrogen-receptor status. Patients with HER2-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer may gain little benefit from the administration of paclitaxel after adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide.

Dose-escalation of filgrastim does not improve efficacy: clinical tolerability and long-term follow-up on CALGB study 9141 adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients using dose-intensified doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical outcomes of an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen designed to incorporate a non-cross-resistant agent (paclitaxel, T) with a maximally dose-intensified regimen of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in conjunction with hematopoietic growth factor support (recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor; G-CSF; Filgrastim). A secondary aim was to assess if a higher dose (10 mcg/kg/day) of G-CSF is more efficacious than the conventional dose (5 mcg/kg/day) in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Female patients with early-stage, node-positive invasive breast cancer were eligible for this multicenter, cooperative group feasibility trial that was designed as the pilot study for a larger randomized clinical trial. The protocol treatment comprised five cycles of dose-intensified AC (75 and 2000 mg/m(2)/cycle, respectively, intravenously every three weeks) with G-CSF support, followed by an additional four cycles of T (175 mg/m(2) by 3h intravenous infusion, every three weeks). Patients were randomized to receive one of two dose levels of G-CSF (5 vs. 10 mcg/kg/day) during AC chemotherapy. Data on both short-term toxicity and long-term survival were collected. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy two node-positive patients with operable primary breast cancer were accrued to this trial between February 1993 and April 1994. 130 of the 172 patients (76%) completed all protocol-specified therapy. Of the 42 early study withdrawals, 23 were due to unacceptable acute treatment-related toxicity. No differences in toxicities or clinical outcomes were noted between the two different dose levels of G-CSF support. At 6.8 years median follow-up, relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for all patients are 70% and 78%, respectively. Ten patients developed second malignancies during follow-up, including three cases with a hematologic malignancy (2% incidence). CONCLUSION: The delivery of dose-intensified AC followed by T was feasible in this large-scale pilot trial, although significant acute toxicities were commonly encountered. The data confirmed the acceptable tolerability of T after aggressive myelotoxic therapy in the adjuvant setting, leading to a larger randomized clinical trial comparing three dose levels of doxorubicin in AC with or without the addition of T (CALGB 9344). Supportive care using twice the conventional dose of G-CSF did not significantly improve the tolerability or change the toxicities of this regimen, and the occurrence of secondary malignancies is consistent with the emerging risk profile of dose-intensive regimens with growth factor support. With long-term follow-up, the clinical outcomes remain relatively favorable and correlate with such expected prognostic factors as the number of involved nodes and hormone receptor status.

Pharmacodynamic markers of perifosine efficacy.

PURPOSE: It is critical to develop methods to quantify the early pharmacodynamic effects of targeted therapeutics in vivo to make drug development more efficient and ensure biologically relevant dosing. Furthermore, an ability to identify patients likely to respond to targeted therapeutics would decrease the size, duration, and cost of clinical trials, resulting in more efficient translation to improved patient outcomes. Recent studies suggest that perifosine inhibits the phosphatidylinositol-3'-kinase (PI3K) pathway by preventing cell membrane recruitment of the AKT pleckstrin homology domain. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A novel functional proteomics technology, reverse phase protein array, was used to establish and quantify pharmacodynamic markers of perifosine efficacy. RESULTS: Perifosine selectively prevents AKT recruitment to the membrane and blocks activation of downstream effectors. Perifosine inhibited breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer models. Growth inhibition was associated with apoptosis. Activation of AKT as a consequence of genomic aberrations predicted perifosine efficacy. In cell lines and xenografts, there was a highly statistically significant correlation between the degree of antitumor efficacy of different perifosine doses and quantified down-regulation of phosphorylation of AKT and of its downstream targets, particularly S6. CONCLUSIONS: Because of a strong correlation between proportional modulation of PI3K pathway biomarkers and quantified perifosine efficacy, it is likely that early measurement of such pharmacodynamic biomarkers with reverse phase protein array will optimize selection of responding patients and guide perifosine dosing. Furthermore, PI3K pathway activation status may allow baseline selection of patients most likely to respond to perifosine alone or in combination with other therapies.

Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women 70 years of age or older with early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In women 70 years of age or older who have early breast cancer, it is unclear whether lumpectomy plus tamoxifen is as effective as lumpectomy followed by tamoxifen plus radiation therapy. METHODS: Between July 1994 and February 1999, we randomly assigned 636 women who were 70 years of age or older and who had clinical stage I (T1N0M0 according to the tumor-node-metastasis classification), estrogen-receptor-positive breast carcinoma treated by lumpectomy to receive tamoxifen plus radiation therapy (317 women) or tamoxifen alone (319 women). Primary end points were the time to local or regional recurrence, the frequency of mastectomy for recurrence, breast-cancer-specific survival, the time to distant metastasis, and overall survival. RESULTS: The only significant difference between the two groups was in the rate of local or regional recurrence at five years (1 percent in the group given tamoxifen plus irradiation and 4 percent in the group given tamoxifen alone, P<0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the rates of mastectomy for local recurrence, distant metastases, or five-year rates of overall survival (87 percent in the group given tamoxifen plus irradiation and 86 percent in the tamoxifen group, P=0.94). Assessment by physicians and patients of cosmetic results and adverse events uniformly rated tamoxifen plus irradiation inferior to tamoxifen alone. CONCLUSIONS: Lumpectomy plus adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen alone is a realistic choice for the treatment of women 70 years of age or older who have early, estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer.

Sequencing of chemotherapy and radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer: updated results of a prospective randomized trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal integration of chemotherapy with radiation (RT) for patients with early-stage breast cancer remains uncertain. We present the long-term results of a prospective randomized trial to address this question. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-four patients were randomly assigned after conservative breast surgery to receive 12 weeks of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, methotrexate, fluorouracil, and prednisone (CAMFP) before RT (CT-first) or after RT (RT-first). Median follow-up for surviving patients was 135 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the CT-first and RT-first arms in time to any event, distant metastasis, or death. Sites of first failure were also not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Among breast cancer patients treated with conservative surgery, there is no advantage to giving RT before adjuvant chemotherapy. However, this study does not have enough statistical power to rule out a clinically important survival benefit for either sequence.

Effect of addition of adjuvant paclitaxel on radiotherapy delivery and locoregional control of node-positive breast cancer: cancer and leukemia group B 9344.

PURPOSE: We compared radiotherapy (RT) delivery and locoregional control in patients with node-positive breast cancer randomly assigned on Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9344 to receive adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) with patients assigned to receive AC followed by paclitaxel (AC+T). METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant AC versus AC+T chemotherapy. RT was required if breast-conserving surgery was performed but was elective after mastectomy. Information about RT delivery was retrospectively collected. Cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence (LRR), use of elective RT, and RT delivery were compared between treatment arms. RESULTS: For patients treated with breast-conserving surgery and RT, the 5-year cumulative incidence of isolated LRR was 9.7% in the AC arm and 3.7% in the AC+T arm (P = .04) and of LRR as any component of failure was 12.9% versus 6.1%, respectively (P = .04). Although LRR rates in patients who did not receive postmastectomy RT were lower in the AC+T arm, the difference was not statistically significant. Despite the lack of protocol guidelines, RT use did not differ between arms, nor did RT dose, treatment interruption, or completion. CONCLUSION: Despite the delay to RT during additional chemotherapy, adjuvant AC+T afforded better local control than AC alone in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Addition of paclitaxel did not adversely affect delivery or ability to tolerate RT, as indicated by similar rates of completion of timely, full-dose RT between arms.

Comparison of HER2 status by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry to predict benefit from dose escalation of adjuvant doxorubicin-based therapy in node-positive breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: HER2 is a clinically important tumor marker in breast cancer; however, there is controversy regarding which method reliably measures HER2 status. We compared three HER2 laboratory methods: immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to predict disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) after adjuvant doxorubicin-based therapy in node-positive breast cancer patients. METHODS: This is a Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) study, using 524 tumor blocks collected from breast cancer patients registered to clinical trial CALGB 8541. IHC employed CB11 and AO-11-854 monoclonal antibodies; FISH used PathVysion HER2 DNA Probe kit; PCR utilized differential PCR (D-PCR) methodology. RESULTS: Cases HER2 positive by IHC, FISH and D-PCR were 24%, 17%, and 18%, respectively. FISH and IHC were clearly related (kappa = 64.8%). All three methods demonstrated a similar relationship for DFS and OS. By any method, for patients with HER2-negative tumors, there was little or no effect of dose of adjuvant doxorubicin-based therapy. For patients with HER2-positive tumors, all three methods predicted a benefit from dose-intense (high-dose) compared with low- or moderate-dose adjuvant doxorubicin-based therapy. CONCLUSION: FISH is a reliable method to predict clinical outcome following adjuvant doxorubicin-based therapy for stage II breast cancer patients. There is a moderate level of concordance among the three methods (IHC, FISH, PCR). None of the methods is clearly superior. Although IHC-positive/FISH-positive tumors yielded the greatest interaction with dose of therapy in predicting outcome, no combination of assays tested was statistically superior.

Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer.

CONTEXT: Breast cancer estrogen-receptor (ER) status is useful in predicting benefit from endocrine therapy. It may also help predict which patients benefit from advances in adjuvant chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy achieved by patients with ER-negative vs ER-positive tumors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Trial data from the Cancer and Leukemia Group B and US Breast Cancer Intergroup analyzed; patient outcomes by ER status compared using hazards over time and multivariate models. Randomized trials comparing (1): 3 regimens of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (January 1985 to April 1991); (2) 3 doses of doxorubicin concurrent with cyclophosphamide, with or without subsequent paclitaxel (May 1994 to April 1997); (3) sequential doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide with concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel, and also 3-week vs 2-week cycles (September 1997 to March 1999). A total of 6644 node-positive breast cancer patients received adjuvant treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS: For ER-negative tumors, chemotherapy improvements reduced the relative risk of recurrence by 21%, 25%, and 23% in the 3 studies, respectively, and 55% comparing the lowest dose in the first study with biweekly cycles in the third study. Corresponding relative risk reductions for ER-positive tumors treated with tamoxifen were 9%, 12%, and 8% in the 3 studies, and 26% overall. The overall mortality rate reductions associated with chemotherapy improvements were 55% and 23% among ER-negative and ER-positive patients, respectively. All individual ER-negative comparisons and no ER-positive comparisons were statistically significant. Absolute benefits due to chemotherapy were greater for patients with ER-negative compared with ER-positive tumors: 22.8% more ER-negative patients survived to 5 years disease-free if receiving chemotherapy vs 7.0% for ER-positive patients; corresponding improvements for overall survival were 16.7% vs 4.0%. CONCLUSION: Among patients with node-positive tumors, ER-negative breast cancer, biweekly doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide plus paclitaxel lowers the rate of recurrence and death by more than 50% in comparison with low-dose cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil as used in the first study.

Association of angiogenesis and disease outcome in node-positive breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B correlative science study from protocols 8541/8869.

PURPOSE: Increased microvessel density (MVD), a reflection of tumor angiogenesis, is associated with diminished relapse-free and overall survival (OS) in several subsets of breast cancer patients. However, the utility of this assay in node-positive patients treated with adjuvant cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) has not been well studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Immunostaining for factor VIII-related antigen was performed on tissue sections from a subset of node-positive patients who received one of three dose/schedule regimens of CAF during participation in Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 8541. Sections from 577 cancers exhibited acceptable tumor and immunostaining quality and were included in the study. Each section was examined quantitatively for MVD as well as non-quantitatively by scoring the presence or absence of a prominent vascular pattern. RESULTS: MVD counts were not associated with relapse-free or OS in univariate analysis. The presence of a prominent plexiform vascular pattern was correlated with decreased OS (P =.0085) in univariate analysis, but this pattern was not an independent prognostic indicator of survival in multivariate analysis. No apparent clinically important interactions between measures of angiogenesis, other prognostic factors, administration of tamoxifen, and chemotherapy dose were observed. CONCLUSION: Assessment of angiogenesis does not provide useful information regarding prognosis in node-positive breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant CAF, nor do these measures predict which patients will benefit from dose intensification or addition of tamoxifen.

Randomized phase III trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus vinorelbine or mitomycin C plus vinblastine in women with taxane-refractory advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with that of a common salvage regimen (comparator) in patients with taxane-refractory advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following failure of a first- or second-line taxane-containing regimen for metastatic disease, 301 women were randomly assigned to receive PLD (50 mg/m(2) every 28 days); or comparator-vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) weekly) or mitomycin C (10 mg/m(2) day 1 and every 28 days) plus vinblastine (5 mg/m(2) day 1, day 14, day 28, and day 42) every 6 to 8 weeks. Patients were stratified before random assignment based on number of previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease and presence of bone metastases only. RESULTS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar for PLD and comparator (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.62; P =.11; median, 2.9 months [PLD] and 2.5 months [comparator]; OS: HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33; P =.71; median, 11.0 months [PLD] and 9.0 months [comparator]). In anthracycline-naïve patients, PFS was somewhat longer with PLD, relative to the comparator (n = 44; median PFS, 5.8 v 2.1 months; HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.16 to 4.95; P =.01). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (23% to 31%), vomiting (17% to 20%), and fatigue (9% to 20%) and were similar among treatment groups. PLD-treated patients experienced more palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (37%; 18% grade 3, 1 patient grade 4) and stomatitis (22%; 5% grades 3/4). Neuropathy (11%), constipation (16%), and neutropenia (14%) were more common with vinorelbine. Alopecia was low in both the PLD and vinorelbine groups (3% and 5%). CONCLUSION: PLD has efficacy comparable to that of common salvage regimens in patients with taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer, thereby representing a useful therapeutic option.

Natural history of more than 20 years of node-positive primary breast carcinoma treated with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy: a study by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer heterogeneity dictates lengthy follow-up to assess outcomes. Efficacy differences for three regimens that are based on adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) are presented in this article, but cancer recurrence sites, time of relapse, subsequent primary cancers, and causes of death in the natural history of node-positive breast cancer are emphasized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Beginning in 1975, 905 patients with node-positive cancer were randomly assigned to receive CMF or two regimens of CMF plus other agents. Median follow-up is 22.6 years. The natural-history analysis was performed on a subset of 814 patients. RESULTS: Eighty percent of the 599 women known to have died, died of metastatic breast cancer. Only 8.5% of the deceased women died of a cause other than breast cancer, a second or third cancer, or adjuvant chemotherapy toxicity. One hundred five women (12.8%) developed other primary cancers, with 49 (46.6%) occurring in the contralateral breast. Therapeutic efficacy differences of the CMF regimens reported earlier have been maintained more than 20 years later. For certain subsets, the five-drug regimen had advantages over CMF. Bone was the most common recurrence site. The longest interval to relapse has been 23.5 years, and 18% of those who relapsed did so more than 10 years later. CONCLUSION: Despite adjuvant chemotherapy, a large majority (80%) of women with node-positive breast cancer die of the disease, and many recurrences develop more than 10 years later. CMF plus vincristine and prednisone provides a benefit compared with CMF, but the magnitude varies with the number of involved nodes. Outcome trends in earlier analyses of this study were maintained even years later.

Failure of higher-dose paclitaxel to improve outcome in patients with metastatic breast cancer: cancer and leukemia group B trial 9342.

PURPOSE: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Protocol 9342 was initiated to determine the optimal dose of paclitaxel administered as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks to women with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred seventy-four women with metastatic breast cancer who had received one or no prior chemotherapy regimens were randomly assigned to one of three paclitaxel dosing regimens-175 mg/m(2), 210 mg/m(2), or 250 mg/m(2)-each administered as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Women completed self-administered quality of life and symptom assessment questionnaires at baseline and after three cycles of treatment. RESULTS: No evidence of a significant dose-response relationship was demonstrated over the dose range assessed. Response rates were 23%, 26%, and 21% for the three regimens, respectively. A marginally significant association (P =.04) was seen between dose and time to progression; however, in a multivariate analysis, the difference was even less apparent. No statistically significant difference was seen in survival. Neurotoxicity and hematologic toxicity were more severe on the higher dose arms. There was no significant difference in quality of life on the three arms. CONCLUSION: Higher doses of paclitaxel administered as a 3-hour infusion to women with metastatic breast cancer did not improve response rate, survival, or quality of life. There was a slight improvement in time to progression with higher dose therapy, which was offset by greater toxicity. When a 3-hour infusion of paclitaxel is administered every 3 weeks, 175 mg/m(2) should be considered the optimal dose.

Improved outcomes from adding sequential Paclitaxel but not from escalating Doxorubicin dose in an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive primary breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine whether increasing the dose of doxorubicin in or adding paclitaxel to a standard adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for breast cancer patients would prolong time to recurrence and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After surgical treatment, 3,121 women with operable breast cancer and involved lymph nodes were randomly assigned to receive a combination of cyclophosphamide (C), 600 mg/m(2), with one of three doses of doxorubicin (A), 60, 75, or 90 mg/m(2), for four cycles followed by either no further therapy or four cycles of paclitaxel at 175 mg/m(2). Tamoxifen was given to 94% of patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors. RESULTS: There was no evidence of a doxorubicin dose effect. At 5 years, disease-free survival was 69%, 66%, and 67% for patients randomly assigned to 60, 75, and 90 mg/m(2), respectively. The hazard reductions from adding paclitaxel to CA were 17% for recurrence (adjusted Wald chi(2) P =.0023; unadjusted Wilcoxon P =.0011) and 18% for death (adjusted P =.0064; unadjusted P =.0098). At 5 years, the disease-free survival (+/- SE) was 65% (+/- 1) and 70% (+/- 1), and overall survival was 77% (+/- 1) and 80% (+/- 1) after CA alone or CA plus paclitaxel, respectively. The effects of adding paclitaxel were not significantly different in subsets defined by the protocol, but in an unplanned subset analysis, the hazard ratio of CA plus paclitaxel versus CA alone was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.86) for those with estrogen receptor-negative tumors and only 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.07) for patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors, almost all of whom received adjuvant tamoxifen. The additional toxicity from adding four cycles of paclitaxel was generally modest. CONCLUSION: The addition of four cycles of paclitaxel after the completion of a standard course of CA improves the disease-free and overall survival of patients with early breast cancer.

High-dose versus standard chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: comparison of Cancer and Leukemia Group B trials with data from the Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry.

PURPOSE: To assess survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) versus standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: SDC in four Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trials was compared with hematopoietic stem-cell support in patients from the Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry. Cox proportional hazard regression incorporated potentially confounding effects. A total of 1,509 women were enrolled onto CALGB trials, and 1,188 women received HDC. No significant survival differences existed by CALGB trial or HDC regimen. Consideration was restricted to candidates for both SDC and HDC. The resulting sample included 635 SDC and 441 HDC patients. The outcome of interest was overall survival. RESULTS: The HDC group displayed better performance status. The SDC group had slightly better survival in first year after treatment. The HDC group had lower hazard of death from years 1 to 4 and had somewhat higher probability of 5-year survival (adjusted probabilities [95% confidence intervals], 23% [17% to 29%] v 15% [11% to 19%], P =.03). CONCLUSION: After controlling for known prognostic factors in this nonrandomized analysis of two large independent data sets, women receiving HDC versus SDC for metastatic breast cancer have a similar short-term probability of survival, and might have a modestly higher long-term probability of survival.

Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: rates of ductal carcinoma in situ: a US perspective.

The incidence of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in the USA exceeds that of other countries. This cannot be explained entirely by the frequency of mammographic screening in the USA and may result from differences in the interpretation of mammograms and/or the frequency with which biopsies are obtained. Although the percentage of DCIS patients treated with mastectomy has decreased, the absolute number is unchanged and the use of lumpectomy with whole-breast radiotherapy has increased in inverse proportion to the decrease in mastectomy. Treatment of DCIS with tamoxifen is still limited.