Continuing chemotherapy or not after the induction treatment in advanced breast cancer patients. clinical outcomes and oncologists' preferences

Comparison of two regimens of weekly paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer: propensity score-matched analysis of real-world data

Purpose

Weekly gemcitabine + paclitaxel (wGT) administration is widely applied in real-world clinical practice. The 28-day and 21-day regimens of wGT are the most widely accepted regimens. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of wGT administration in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and compared the two regimens.

Methods

Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)-negative MBC who received wGT between October 2013 and October 2016 were identified using an electronic database. The outcome variables included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety profile. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize potential confounders.

Results

A total of 140 patients were included. The median PFS and OS was 7.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 7.0-8.7] months and 22.5 (95% CI = 18.8-26.1) months, respectively. The toxicity of wGT was manageable. Among the patients, 90 (64.3%) received the 21-day regimen and 50 (35.7%) received the 28-day regimen. A higher number of younger patients and patients receiving later-line therapy received the 28-day regimen. There was no significant difference between the two groups in PFS after propensity score matching, though subgroup analysis showed that patients with early relapse benefited more from the 28-day regimen. The ORR was numerically higher in 28-day regimen (37.8% versus 28.0%, p = 0.310). However, the 21-day regimen was better tolerated than the 28-day regimen.

Conclusion

wGT administration showed efficacy and safety in patients with MBC. The efficacy was comparable between the two regimens after adjustment for confounding factors while the 21-day regimen was better tolerated.

Plain Language Summary

21-day regimen of wGT was well tolerated in patients with metastatic breast cancer Weekly gemcitabine + paclitaxel (wGT) administration is widely applied in real-world clinical practice. The 28-day and 21-day regimens of wGT are the most widely accepted regimens. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of wGT administration in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and compared the two regimens. Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)-negative MBC who received wGT between October 2013 and October 2016 were identified using an electronic database. The outcome variables included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety profile. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize potential confounders. We found that the efficacy was comparable between the two regimens after adjustment for confounding factors while the 21-day regimen was better tolerated.

Q-TWiST analysis of pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer that expresses PD-L1

OBJECTIVE

In the KEYNOTE-355 (KN355) trial, pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy demonstrated superior efficacy and manageable safety compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) with PD-L1 positive (Combined Positive Score [CPS]≥ 10) tumours. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical benefits and risks of pembrolizumab measured by quality-adjusted survival in the trial population.

METHODS

The study used data from the final analysis of KN355. The Quality-adjusted Time Without Symptoms of disease progression or Toxicity of treatment (Q-TWiST) analysis was used to compare treatments of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. Patients' survival time was partitioned into three health states - toxicity before disease progression (TOX), time without symptoms or toxicity before disease progression (TWiST), and relapse (REL). Utilities for these health states were estimated using EuroQol-5 Dimensions, 3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L) data collected in KN355. Q-TWiST was derived as the utility-weighted sum of the mean health state durations.

RESULTS

Patients randomised to pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy had 3.7 months greater Q-TWiST (relative gain of 18%; P = 0.003) compared to those randomised to chemotherapy at the median follow-up of 44 months, and 4.3 months greater Q-TWiST (relative gain of 20%; P = 0.004) at the maximum follow-up of 52 months. The Q-TWiST gain increased with longer follow-up time.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was associated with statistically significant and clinically important improvement in Q-TWiST compared to chemotherapy in previously untreated PD-L1-positive mTNBC.

Secondary analyses of the randomized phase III Stop&Go study: efficacy of second-line intermittent versus continuous chemotherapy in HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

Background: Previously, we showed that reintroduction of the same (first-line) chemotherapy at progression could only partially make up for the loss in efficacy as compared to continuously delivered first-line chemotherapy. Here, we report the probability of starting second-line study chemotherapy in the Stop&Go trial, and the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients who received both the first- and second-line treatment in an intermittent versus continuous schedule.Methods: First-line chemotherapy comprised paclitaxel plus bevacizumab, second-line capecitabine or non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, given per treatment line as two times four cycles (intermittent) or as eight consecutive cycles (continuous).Results: Of the 420 patients who started first-line treatment within the Stop&Go trial (210:210), a total of 270 patients continued on second-line study treatment (64% of all), which consisted of capecitabine in 201 patients and of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in 69 patients, evenly distributed between the treatment arms. Median PFS was 3.7 versus 5.0 months (HR 1.07; 95% CI: 0.82-1.38) and median OS 10.9 versus 12.4 months (HR 1.27; 95% CI: 0.98-1.66) for intermittent versus continuous second-line chemotherapy. Second-line PFS was positively influenced by prior hormonal therapy for metastatic disease and longer first-line PFS duration, while triple-negative tumor status had a negative influence. Patients with a shorter time to progression (TTP) in first-line (≤10 months) had a higher probability of starting second-line treatment if they received intermittent compared to continuous chemotherapy (OR 1.97; 95% CI: 1.02-3.80).Conclusion: We recommend continuous scheduling of both the first- and second-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer.

The role of chemotherapy in treatment of advanced breast cancer: an overview for clinical practice

This review aims to evaluate the role of chemotherapy-containing regimens in the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC), with the purpose to optimize selection, sequencing and duration of treatment with the currently available agents for clinical practice. Data from observational as well as randomized phase II and III studies were included. Chemotherapy yielded a median overall survival (OS) of 2 years in registration studies, with comparable efficacy of different agents. Combining chemotherapy agents did not yield OS improvement and caused greater toxicity compared with single-agent chemotherapy. Continuing chemotherapy till progression or unacceptable toxicity generated greater efficacy without detrimental impact on quality of life compared with a limited amount of cycles. In real-world studies, benefits after third-line chemotherapy were modest compared with first- and second-line. Furthermore, effects of previous chemotherapy predicted effects of next-line therapy in real-world. Physicians increasingly prescribed capecitabine or taxanes as first- or second-line chemotherapy over time.

The influence on quality of life of intermittent scheduling in first- and second-line chemotherapy of patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The Stop&Go study randomized patients with advanced breast cancer to intermittent (two times four) or continuous (eight subsequent cycles) first- and second-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

QoL was measured with RAND-36 questionnaires every 12 weeks. The primary objective was to estimate differences in changes from baseline between intermittent and continuous treatment. An effect size of 0.5 SD (5 points) was considered clinically meaningful.

RESULTS

A total of 398 patients were included with a median follow-up of 11.4 months (IQR 5.6-22.2). Mean physical QoL baseline scores were 38.0 resp. 38.2, and mental scores 45.0 resp. 42.4 for intermittent and continuous treatment. Physical QoL declined linearly in the intermittent arm causing a clinically meaningful difference of 5.40 points at 24 months (p < 0.001), while scores in the continuous arm stabilized after a small decline of ± 3.4 points at 12 months. Conversely, mental QoL was fairly stable and even improved with 1.58 (p = 0.005) and 2.48 points (p < 0.001) at 12 months for intermittent and continuous treatment, respectively. When comparing arms for both components in changes from baseline, the maximum differences were 2.46 (p = 0.101) and 1.95 points (p = 0.182) for physical and mental scores, both measured at 30 months and in favor of continuous treatment.

CONCLUSION

Intermittent first- and second-line chemotherapy in patients with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer showed a trend for worse impact on QoL compared to continuous chemotherapy, with neither significant nor meaningful differences in course. We recommend prescribing chemotherapy continuously until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Trial registration EudraCT 2010-021519-18; BOOG 2010-02.

Relationship between physicians' death anxiety and medical communication and decision-making: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between physicians' death anxiety and medical communication and decision-making. It was hypothesized that physicians' death anxiety may lead to the avoidance of end-of-life conversations and a preference for life-prolonging treatments.

METHODS

PubMed and PsycInfo were systematically searched for empirical studies on the relation between physicians' death anxiety and medical communication and decision-making.

RESULTS

This review included five quantitative and two qualitative studies (N = 7). Over 38 relations between death anxiety and communication were investigated, five were in line with and one contradicted our hypothesis. Physicians' death anxiety seemes to make end-of-life communication more difficult. Over 40 relations between death anxiety and decision-making were investigated, three were in line with and two contradicted the hypothesis. Death anxiety seemes related to physicians' guilt or doubt after a patient's death.

CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to confirm that death anxiety is related to more avoidant communication or decision-making. However, death anxiety does seem to make end-of-life communication and decision-making more difficult for physicians.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Education focused on death and dying and physicians' emotions in medical practice may improve the perceived ease with which physicians care for patients at the end of life.

Hormonal therapy might be a better choice as maintenance treatment than capecitabine after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy for patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer

Background

Both hormonal therapy (HT) and maintenance capecitabine monotherapy (MCT) have been shown to extend time to progression (TTP) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after failure of taxanes and anthracycline-containing regimens. However, no clinical trials have directly compared the efficacy of MCT and HT after response to first-line capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy (FCCT) in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the charts of 138 HR-positive and HER2-negative MBC patients who were in non-progression status after FCCT and who were treated between 2003 and 2012 at the Cancer Institute and Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, in Beijing, China. The median number of first-line chemotherapy cycles was 6 (range, 4–8); combined agents included taxanes, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine. Of these 138 patients, 79 received MCT, and 59 received HT. Single-agent capecitabine was administered at a dose of 1250 mg/m² twice daily for 14 days, followed by a 7-day rest period, repeated every 3 weeks. Of the 59 patients who received HT, 37 received aromatase inhibitors (AIs), 8 received selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), and 14 received goserelin plus either AIs or SERMs. We then compared the MCT group and HT group in terms of treatment efficacy.

Results

With a median follow-up of 43 months, patients in the HT group had a much longer TTP than patients in the MCT group (13 vs. 8 months, P = 0.011). When TTP was adjusted for age, menopausal status, Karnofsky performance status score, disease-free survival, site of metastasis, number of metastatic sites, and response status after FCCT, extended TTP was still observed for patients in the HT group (hazard ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.44–0.93; P = 0.020). We also observed a trend of overall survival advantage for patients in the HT group vs. patients in the MCT group, but the difference was not significant (43 vs. 37 months, P = 0.400). In addition, patients in the HT group generally tolerated the treatment well, whereas patients in the MCT group experienced grades 3–4 adverse events, the most frequent of which were hand-foot syndrome (15.8%) and hematologic abnormalities (7.6%).

Conclusion

For HR-positive and HER2-negative MBC patients, HT might be considered a treatment after response to FCCT but prior to MCT as a long-term administration.

Maintenance hormonal and chemotherapy treatment in metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

Endocrine treatment is the first-line therapy in hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer while chemotherapy is the first option in tumors refractory to endocrine therapy and in hormone-negative disease. Optimal duration, efficacy and safety of a maintenance endocrine therapy or chemotherapy after an induction treatment are still a matter of debate. We performed a literature review to identify studies regarding maintenance hormonal and chemotherapy treatments in metastatic breast cancer. We analyzed data relating to efficacy (improvement of progression-free survival and overall survival) and safety (symptoms relief and quality of life [QoL]). Maintenance endocrine therapy could prolong progression-free survival with a better control of symptoms and improving QoL. Maintenance chemotherapy prolong the response to a previous treatment, worsening the QoL, except for metronomic capecitabine.

Physician experiences and preferences in the treatment of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the United States: a physician survey

Sequential endocrine therapy (ET) is recommended for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and without visceral symptoms. Chemotherapy (CT) can be considered after sequential ETs, but is associated with adverse side effects. We assessed physicians' preferences and self-reported prescribing patterns for ET and CT in the treatment of HR+/HER2- mBC at community practices in the United States. Community-based oncologists/hematologists from a nationwide online panel who treated postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC were invited to complete a survey, blinded to the identity of study sponsor. Treatment preferences were collected by treatment class of ET-based regimens versus CT and by agent for postmenopausal HR+/HER2- mBC patients after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor use in the adjuvant or mBC setting. Among 213 physicians who completed the survey, 78% were male, 71% were based in small/intermediate practices (2-9 oncologists/subspecialists), 55% had >10 years of experience, and 58% referred to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines when treating mBC. Among first-line ETs, anastrozole was the most frequently used treatment (35%), followed by everolimus-based (EVE, 34%) and fulvestrant-based (FUL, 15%) therapy. After first-line ET, the most preferred second- and third-line treatments were ET monotherapy (48% and 39%), ET combination therapy (31% and 19%), and CT monotherapy (13% and 30%). Comparing EVE versus FUL, physicians preferred EVE in all lines but first line. Efficacy was the most important consideration for treatment choice. Physicians prescribed CT in early lines mainly because of visceral symptoms. This survey of treatment patterns for HR+/HER2- mBC in community practice suggested that after first-line ET, ET mono- or combination therapy was commonly used for the second- and third-line treatments and CT monotherapy for third- or later line treatments. CTs were used in early lines for patients with visceral symptoms.

First-line chemotherapy with docetaxel plus capecitabine followed by capecitabine or hormone maintenance therapy for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients

The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate whether maintenance therapy with capecitabine or hormone replacement therapy (HRT) results in improved progression-free survival (PFS) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients who had previously achieved disease control with first-line docetaxel plus capecitabine (TX) chemotherapy. Seventy-nine metastatic breast cancer patients treated between January 2008 and June 2013 with TX chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. Following successful initial disease control by the combination chemotherapy, 39 patients received single-agent capecitabine maintenance therapy and 40 patients received HRT as maintenance therapy. The PFS time, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate and safety of the two groups were compared. The median PFS of the total cohort (n=79) was 11.0 months. Furthermore, the median PFS time of the capecitabine (n=39) and HRT groups (n=40) were 10.9 and 11.1 months, respectively (P=0.283). Compared with the PFS time of maintenance treatment only, single-agent capecitabine treatment following TX chemotherapy prolonged the PFS time by 6.8 months and HRT following TX chemotherapy prolonged PFS time by 5.8 months (P=0.551). Of the total cohort, 49 patients did not receive palliative endocrine therapy prior to chemotherapy, including 22 patients in the capecitabine maintenance group and 27 patients in the HRT maintenance group. The PFS time from the commencement of maintenance treatment was significantly different between the two groups, 6.1 months in the capecitabine group compared with 11.5 months in the HRT group (P=0.045). For the 30 patients who underwent palliative endocrine therapy prior to TX chemotherapy, the PFS times of the capecitabine and HRT maintenance treatment groups were 7.5 and 4.1 months, respectively (P=0.043). However, the occurrence of adverse events, such as hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity, as well as hand-foot syndrome, were not significantly different between the two groups. The current study indicated that single-agent capecitabine maintenance therapy may be a potential treatment strategy for MBC patients who responded to capecitabine-based chemotherapy. In particular, capecitabine may provide a more effective maintenance treatment duration compared with HRT for patients who had previously undergone first-line palliative HRT for MBC.

Capecitabine maintenance therapy for XT chemotherapy-sensitive patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine maintenance therapy (MT) after initial capecitabine plus docetaxel (XT) chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

METHODS

Fifty-five mTNBC patients treated with XT chemotherapy between May 2007 and June 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. When initial disease control was achieved by the combination chemotherapy, capecitabine was continued for 32 patients (MT), while 23 patients remained without any treatment (non-MT). We compared progression-free survival (PFS) and safety of both groups.

RESULTS

The median PFS of 55 patients was 8.1 months, overall median PFS time of 32 patients in the capecitabine MT group and 23 in the non-MT group was 10.1 vs. 6.7 months (P=0.032), respectively. When compared PFS time of maintenance treatment, single-agent capecitabine prolonged PFS by 7.1 months, for non-MT patients, the PFS without any treatment was 3.1 months, and this between-group difference was statistically significant (P=0.003). Adverse events, including of hematologic toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicities, hand-foot syndrome and abnormal liver function were not significantly different between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

After initial disease control was achieved with the XT combination chemotherapy, capecitabine MT can significantly prolong PFS time with a favorable safety profile in mTNBC patients.

Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST): patient-reported outcome or mathematical model? A systematic review in cancer

OBJECTIVE

Successful cancer treatment is defined as an increase in overall survival and/or progression-free survival. Despite their importance, these metrics omit patient quality of life. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) was developed to adjust survival gained, accounting for quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the methods reported in cancer literature to determine Q-TWiST values and how these are currently translated to the clinic.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used to conduct a systematic review of studies indexed on MEDLINE and Web of Science through April 2013. Cancer studies that measured Q-TWiST either as a primary outcome or retrospectively and determined utility coefficients from a patient population were identified, and their methods reviewed to determine how the utility coefficient was calculated. Additionally, other relevant factors such as definitions of health states and significant findings were collected and summarized.

RESULTS

Out of 284 studies, 11 were identified that calculated patient-defined utility coefficients. Several methods to determine utility coefficients were reported, and multiple definitions of health state toxicity were applied. Of these studies, seven reported significant differences (p < 0.05) in quality-adjusted survival. No studies, however, directly discussed the clinical relevance of their findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, Q-TWiST is utilized as a mathematical theory rather than a clinical tool. Standardization of terminology plus reliability and validity testing of determining both utility coefficients and time frame definitions must be performed before Q-TWiST can become clinically useful to physicians and patients alike for making treatment decisions.

Prolonged clinical benefit from the maintenance hormone therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the efficacy of maintenance hormone therapy (MHT), which was given to hormone positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients in non-progression status to the previous chemotherapy.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 76 MBC patients who had been treated with MHT from 2006 to 2010 at a single institute.

RESULTS

For the 76 patients reviewed, the median progression free survival (PFS) to MHT was 14.4 months (95% CI, 11.6-17.3). Prolonged PFS was associated with less previous palliative chemotherapy, fewer metastatic sites, and the absence of visceral metastasis in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis showed that only the number of previous palliative chemotherapy (HR 1.73, 95% CI, 1.00-2.98; P = 0.04) remained as a significant variable. MHT was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

MHT showed considerable efficacy and tolerability in this study. Further randomized prospective study is warranted.

Phase III, multicenter, randomized trial of maintenance chemotherapy versus observation in patients with metastatic breast cancer after achieving disease control with six cycles of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel as first-line chemotherapy: KCSG-BR07-02

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of our study was to evaluate whether maintenance chemotherapy with paclitaxel/gemcitabine (PG) was superior to observation in improving progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who achieved disease control with an initial six cycles of PG as their first-line treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, phase III trial. Patients MBC with who achieved disease control after six cycles of PG chemotherapy were randomly assigned to maintenance chemotherapy or observation until progression.

RESULTS

Of 324 patients from 10 centers enrolled, 231 patients with MBC exhibited disease control (complete response + partial response + stable disease) with first-line PG and were randomly assigned to maintenance chemotherapy (n = 116) or observation (n = 115). The median age was 48 years (range, 28 to 76 years), median follow-up was 33 months, and median number of chemotherapy cycles in the maintenance group after random assignment was six. The median PFS time after random assignment was longer in the maintenance group than in the observation group (7.5 v 3.8 months, respectively; P = .026). The median overall survival (OS) time was longer in the maintenance group than in the observation group (32.3 v 23.5 months, respectively; P = .047). The rate of grade 3 or higher neutropenia after random assignment was higher in the maintenance group than in the observation group (61% v 0.9%, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with MBC who achieved disease control with an initial six cycles of PG chemotherapy, maintenance PG chemotherapy resulted in better PFS and OS compared with observation.

Extending the duration of first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a perspective review

The treatment of metastatic breast cancer is mainly palliative, but optimal management might result in survival improvement as well. For this reason, many trials have attempted to optimize the therapeutic approach in this disease setting. Among the possible options, chemotherapy represents the backbone of the treatment and survival improvements that have been shown by the use of modern chemotherapeutic agents. Whereas the type of chemotherapy is generally dictated by patient characteristics and those of their disease, substantial controversy still remains on how long chemotherapy should be administered after disease control is achieved. In this review, we have analysed all available evidence on the duration of first-line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer.

Duration of Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of different first-line chemotherapy durations in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Methods

We searched literature databases to identify randomized controlled trials that compared different chemotherapy durations in the first-line treatment of MBC. Only trials with unconfounded comparisons of additional cycles of chemotherapy were included. The main outcome measures for this analysis were OS and PFS. Published data from retrieved studies were analyzed according to standard meta-analytic techniques.

Results

We found 11 randomized clinical trials including 2,269 patients. Longer first-line chemotherapy duration resulted into a significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.99; P = .046) and PFS (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.76; P < .001). There were no differences in effects on either OS or PFS between subgroups defined by time of random assignment, study design, number of chemotherapy cycles in the control arm or concomitant endocrine therapy.

Conclusion

Longer first-line chemotherapy duration is associated with marginally longer OS and a substantially longer PFS.

Maintenance treatment with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus observation following induction chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: GEICAM 2001-01 study

This randomized multicenter phase III trial evaluated the role of maintenance therapy with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) after induction chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients without disease progression following first-line induction chemotherapy consisting of three cycles of doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) followed by three cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)) both every 21 days, were randomized to PLD (40 mg/m(2)) every 28 days for six cycles or to observation. Time to progression (TTP) was the primary endpoint. 288 patients were enrolled and received induction first-line chemotherapy. One hundred and fifty-five achieved response or stable disease and were randomized to maintenance PLD (n = 78) or observation (n = 77). With a median follow-up of 20 months from randomization (range 1-56), disease progression occurred in 94% of patients. PLD significantly improved TTP by 3.3 months (8.4 vs. 5.1 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.39 to 0.76, P = 0.0002) compared with observation. Overall survival was not significantly prolonged with PLD (24.8 vs. 22.0 months, respectively; HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.58-1.27, P = 0.44). PLD-induced toxicity was mild and manageable with up to 5% of patients experiencing grade 3/4 non-hematologic events (fatigue, mucositis, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia). Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 12% of patients; two patients developed febrile neutropenia. This phase III trial demonstrated that maintenance chemotherapy with PLD is well tolerated and offers improved TTP in patients with MBC following first-line chemotherapy.

Novel therapeutic approaches to the treatment of metastatic breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer is ultimately an incurable disease, although recent data have shown that its incidence is decreasing and that patients with metastatic breast cancer live longer. This improvement in survival seems to be linked with the introduction of new therapeutic agents, novel combinations of existing therapies and targeted therapies. Our increasing understanding of the molecular biology of metastatic disease has allowed the development of therapies aimed at specific molecular targets. Some of these have already been approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in combination with cytotoxics, and others have shown promising results regarding disease-free survival, overall response rates and time to disease progression. Given the enormous amount of information about drug discovery in cancer, it is important to be familiar with the present state of the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the development of some of the most promising novel agents and treatment strategies in metastatic breast cancer.

Maintenance treatment in metastatic breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) occurs in 20-30% of women with breast cancer and is an incurable disease. Treatment is palliative and directed to prolong survival, decrease symptoms and improve patients' quality of life. For patients with hormone receptor-negative disease or for hormone receptor-positive disease that has become resistant to endocrine therapy, or is progressing rapidly and life threatening, cytotoxic chemotherapy is indicated. However, the optimal duration of chemotherapy treatment for MBC is still a matter of debate. Studies using maintenance chemotherapy regimens standard in the 1990s showed a consistent benefit with a more prolonged time to progression, although an improvement in survival was only demonstrated in one study. Two recent trials with newer cytotoxic agents showed controversial results; whereas one study concluded that the policy of prolonging treatment in chemotherapy-sensitive patients, after aggressive, modern combination chemotherapy, cannot be recommended for women with MBC, the other study showed that maintenance therapy with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin significantly prolonged time to progression in MBC patients after first-line chemotherapy without significant clinical toxicity. Initial data regarding metronomic chemotherapy indicate that continuously low-dose cyclophosphamide and methotrexate is minimally toxic and effective in heavily pretreated breast cancer patients. In daily practice, maintenance chemotherapy is a reasonable strategy that prolongs time to progression in patients with MBC who did not show progression after first-line chemotherapy. However, this benefit should be considered together with toxicities of treatment and the patient's preference.

Q-TWiST analysis of lapatinib combined with capecitabine for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer

The addition of lapatinib (Tykerb/Tyverb) to capecitabine (Xeloda) delays disease progression more effectively than capecitabine monotherapy in women with previously treated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity of treatment (Q-TWiST) method was used to compare treatments. The area under survival curves was partitioned into health states: toxicity (TOX), time without symptoms of disease progression or toxicity (TWiST), and relapse period until death or end of follow-up (REL). Average times spent in each state, weighted by utility, were derived and comparisons of Q-TWiST between groups performed with varying combinations of the utility weights. Utility weights of 0.5 for both TOX and REL, that is, counting 2 days of TOX or REL as 1 day of TWiST, resulted in a 7-week difference in quality-adjusted survival favouring combination therapy (P=0.0013). The Q-TWiST difference is clinically meaningful and was statistically significant across an entire matrix of possible utility weights. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. An analysis with utilities based on EQ-5D scores was consistent with the above findings. Combination therapy of lapatinib with capecitabine resulted in greater quality-adjusted survival than capecitabine monotherapy in trastuzumab-refractory MBC patients.

Maintenance hormonal treatment improves progression free survival after a first line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer

The present study was conducted in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Its aim was to identify the factors which influence progression -free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after the first line of chemotherapy in patients with positive tumour hormone receptor status. The patients with early disease progression during first-line chemotherapy were not included. In total, 560 patients who achieved a stable disease or a response to first-line chemotherapy were studied. The factors identified to improve the duration of PFS or OS in multivariate analysis were: number of metastatic sites (p = .01; p = .01), metastatic sites (p = .02; p = .04), Disease free interval (p = .001; p < .0001), previous hormonal therapy (p = .03; p = ns), response to first line chemotherapy (p < .0001; p = 0.0001) and an administration of maintenance hormonal therapy (p < .0001; p = .001). The major impact obtained by maintenance hormonal treatment after first-line chemotherapy in this study seems to indicate that this strategy should be recommended in patients with an ER or PgR positive tumour.

Achievements in systemic therapies in the pregenomic era in metastatic breast cancer

Over the last decades, the introduction of several new agents into clinical practice has significantly improved disease control and obtained some, albeit rare, survival benefits in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Despite these results, the choice of treatment for the majority of patients is still empirically based, since the only two predictive factors with level 1 evidence for clinical use are hormonal receptor status for endocrine therapy and HER-2 status for trastuzumab therapy. Important improvements in the endocrine therapy of both pre- and postmenopausal women with hormone-responsive disease have been achieved. For premenopausal women, ovarian function suppression with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs combined with tamoxifen has become the standard treatment, although aromatase inhibitors plus ovarian function suppression are under evaluation. In postmenopausal patients, aromatase inhibitors have proved to be superior to standard endocrine therapies in either first- or second-line treatment and a novel antiestrogen compound, fulvestrant, has been introduced in clinical practice. Chemotherapy remains the treatment of choice for hormone unresponsive or resistant patients. Anthracyclines and taxanes have been used either alone or in combination as first-line chemotherapy, but with the more frequent use of these agents in the adjuvant setting, new standards are needed for first-line chemotherapy, and new and more efficacious treatments are required. In the subgroup of patients with tumors that overexpress HER-2, the use of trastuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy has modified the natural history of these tumors, even if only about one out of two patients obtains a clinical response. In this review we summarize the main achievements and the currently available treatment options for patients with MBC.

Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer

Cytotoxic chemotherapy is a mainstay of treatment for advanced breast cancer. Treatment of metastatic (also called stage IV, advanced, or recurrent) breast cancer is not considered curative. Rather, the goals of treatment with chemotherapy are to prolong survival, alleviate or prevent tumor-related symptoms or complications, and improve quality of life. While the purpose of chemotherapy is to prevent or alleviate symptoms, chemotherapy paradoxically carries considerable toxicities that cause substantial symptoms in patients, notoriously including fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hair loss, mucositis, neutropenia, and neuropathy. Balancing the benefits and the side effects of chemotherapy is further complicated by the natural history of advanced breast cancer, which can be quite prolonged and typically involves multiple lines of chemotherapy, especially in patients whose tumors respond to treatment.

Lack of Benefit of Maintenance Paclitaxel in First-Line Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose

This randomized study compared maintenance paclitaxel with control in metastatic breast cancer patients not experiencing progression after first-line anthracycline/paclitaxel combination chemotherapy.

Methods

Between April 1998 and October 2003, 459 metastatic breast cancer patients received first-line combination chemotherapy with epirubicin or doxorubicin plus paclitaxel. Of these, 255 who had a response or stable disease were then randomly assigned onto the Maintenance Paclitaxel 1 (MANTA1) study, comparing eight courses of maintenance paclitaxel versus control (ie, no additional chemotherapy administration). The primary end point was progression-free survival.

Results

The study was prematurely concluded after a futility analysis, which was performed on 215 of the 238 patients randomly assigned within December 2002. Of these, 109 patients were assigned to maintenance paclitaxel and 106 were assigned to stopping chemotherapy. No significant difference in median progression-free survival was observed (8.0 months for maintenance paclitaxel and 9.0 months for control). There was no significant difference in median survival time (28.0 v 29.0 months). When the Bayesian method for monitoring clinical trials was applied to these data, even under an enthusiastic prior distribution, in the posterior distribution there was only an 8.6% chance of observing a 3-month improvement in median progression-free survival in the group receiving maintenance paclitaxel. After these results study accrual was closed.

Conclusion

Compared with control, the administration of additional courses of paclitaxel in patients who achieve disease control after six to eight courses of first-line anthracycline plus paclitaxel combination chemotherapy does not improve progression-free survival.

Second consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer

The present consensus manuscript defines evidence-based recommendations for state-of-the-art treatment of metastatic breast cancer depending on disease-associated and biologic variables.

Maintenance hormone therapy with letrozole after first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Maintenance hormone therapy after first-line chemotherapy is routinely used by many clinicians in advanced breast cancer patients with potentially hormone-sensitive tumors, although there are insufficient evidences in the literature to support this practice. We investigated the effects of the third-generation aromatase inhibitor letrozole as a maintenance therapy in postmenopausal patients who had responded or had stable disease with first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients (median age 62 years, range 31-80) were recruited and received letrozole, 2.5 mg/day starting within 8 weeks since the last cycle of chemotherapy. Estrogen and/or progesterone receptor status was positive in 81% of the patients, unknown in 19%; 57% of the patients had visceral disease. First-line chemotherapy included anthracyclines and/or taxanes in 74% of cases.

RESULTS

The median time to progression (TTP) from starting letrozole was 18.5 months. A shorter TTP was found in patients with abnormal CA 15-3 levels at the start of maintenance letrozole (median TTP, 9.9 months: p = 0.01), or with levels increasing >25% from baseline during the first 6 months of letrozole therapy (median TTP, 8.2 months: p < 0.0001). Response status improved during letrozole in 15.5% of patients who had obtained less than a complete response to chemotherapy. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated and had no significant impact on quality of life scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence in support of the common clinical practice of maintenance hormone therapy after chemotherapy in suitably selected patients with advanced breast cancer.

Breast cancer

Breast cancer remains a public-health issue on a global scale. We report new information about the disease from the past 5 years. Early age at first birth, increasing parity, and tamoxifen use are related to long-term lifetime reduction in breast-cancer risk. Ductal carcinomas in situ has been suggested to be renamed ductal intraepithelial neoplasia to emphasise its non-life-threatening nature. An alternative approach, the progenitor/stem cell theory, predicts that only some tumour cells cause cancer progression and that these should be targeted by treatment. Mammography and ultrasonography are still the most effective for women with non-dense and dense breast tissues, respectively. Additionally, MRI, lymphatic mapping, the nipple-sparing mastectomy, partial breast irradiation, neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and adjuvant treatments are promising for subgroups of breast-cancer patients. Although tamoxifen can be offered for endocrine-responsive disease, aromatase inhibitors are increasingly used. Assessment of potential molecular targets is now important in primary diagnosis. Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors and other drugs with anti-angiogenesis properties are currently undergoing preclinical investigations.

Chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is intended to summarize the most up-to-date information in the field of chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the past year, the literature on chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer has focused on three main areas of interest: the development of new cytotoxic agents with most studies addressing the taxane-pretreated population; the evaluation of new combination regimens, mainly incorporating a taxane; and the development of new trastuzumab-cytotoxic-agent combinations in the HER-2-positive population. In addition, interesting data regarding combination versus sequential single-agent chemotherapy and the optimal duration of chemotherapy have been published.

SUMMARY

Interesting new drugs have faced phase II development. Randomized trials will define their role in the daily management of metastatic breast cancer. New combination regimens, generally incorporating a taxane, improve short-term efficacy in comparison with standard anthracycline-based combinations or single-agent chemotherapy, but at the cost of increased toxicity. Trastuzumab can be safely combined with several cytotoxic agents.