A comparison of intermittent vs. continuous and of adriamycin vs. methotrexate 5-drug chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. A Cancer and Leukemia Group B study

Intermittent docetaxel chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients

AIMS

The intermittent administration of chemotherapy is a means of preserving patients' quality of life (QL). The aim of this study was to verify whether the intermittent administration of docetaxel (DOC) improves the patients' QL.

PATIENTS & METHODS

All patients received DOC 70 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for eight cycles. The patients were randomized to receive DOC continuously or with a fixed 3-month interval after the first four DOC courses.

RESULTS

The study involved 148 patients. There was no difference in QL between the groups receiving intermittent or continuous treatment. Intermittence had no detrimental effects on disease control.

CONCLUSION

Although feasible and not detrimental, our results showed that true intermittent chemotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients failed to improve the patients' QL.

Docetaxel rechallenge in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: any place in the modern treatment scenario? An intention to treat evaluation

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the possible advantages of a docetaxel (DCT) rechallenge strategy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, also given the possible earlier positioning of this treatment option in the modern scenario.

PATIENTS & METHODS

All mCRPC patients planned for DCT chemotherapy rechallenge in our institutions were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 128 patients, 98 achieved disease control on the initial DCT round. After a treatment holiday of 8.3 months, the 98 responsive patients underwent a second DCT round, with 56 cases achieving again disease control. After a 5.7-month off-treatment period, 32 of these cases underwent a third DCT round, and 16 responded. Lastly, after a further 4.2-month treatment holiday, eight patients underwent a fourth DCT round and two responded. Median time to definitive disease progression for the whole population was 16.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Rechallenge with DCT may be considered a suitable treatment option for mCRPC patients recurring after a successful DCT chemotherapy. The interest in this strategy may be increased because of the showed efficacy of early DCT chemotherapy in patients with bulky disease (CHAARTED study) and the potential lower efficacy of the new hormonal agents abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide when used in a immediate sequencing.

Intermittent Chemotherapy as a Platform for Testing Novel Agents in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Department of Defense Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium Randomized Phase II Trial of Intermittent Docetaxel With Prednisone With or Without Maintenance GM-CSF

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), an agent that previously demonstrated antitumor activity, was evaluated within an intermittent chemotherapy framework of docetaxel with prednisone (D+P) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

mCRPC patients with ≥ 50% prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline after 6 cycles of D+P were randomized to either GM-CSF or observation (Obs). At disease progression (PD), D+P was reinitiated for 6 cycles followed by the same "off chemotherapy" regimen in patients eligible for chemotherapy interruption. The sequence was repeated until PD during chemotherapy, lack of PSA response to chemotherapy, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was time to chemotherapy resistance (TTCR).

RESULTS

Of 125 patients enrolled, 52 (42%) experienced ≥ 50% PSA decline on induction D+P and were randomized to GM-CSF (n = 27) or Obs (n = 25). The median time to PD was 3.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-3.5) and 1.5 months (95% CI, 1.5-2.4) during the initial course of GM-CSF and Obs, respectively. Twelve of 26 (46%) patients responded to a second course of D+P. Eleven randomized patients (21%) experienced PD during chemotherapy, precluding accurate assessment of TTCR. The remaining 41 randomized patients discontinued study for lack of PSA response to chemotherapy (n = 8), patient choice to not restart chemotherapy with PSA PD (n = 13), toxicity (n = 7), or study withdrawal (n = 13).

CONCLUSION

Conducting a prospective study in mCRPC with maintenance immunotherapy within the framework of intermittent chemotherapy was feasible. The use of PSA instead of radiographic end points limited the number of evaluable patients. This study provides important insight into designing contemporary intermittent chemotherapy trials with maintenance immunotherapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Intermittent tri-weekly docetaxel plus bicalutamide in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a single-arm prospective study using a historical control for comparison

Whether continuous docetaxel (DTX) chemotherapy offers an advantage over intermittent therapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is unknown. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy, toxicity and quality of life (QoL) of intermittent tri-weekly DTX with bicalutamide in CRPC. Forty-two patients (group A) with CRPC were enrolled. The patients received intravenous DTX (75 mg m(-2)) once tri-weekly with oral bicalutamide (50 mg) once daily. Patients had a DTX holiday when the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level declined ≥50%. DTX was restarted in patients with a PSA increase ≥25%. Sixty patients (group B) who had matching characteristics and had continuously received DTX without bicalutamide for 10-12 cycles were also enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences in progression-free survival (8 months vs. 9 months, P=0.866) or overall survival (19 months vs. 21 months, P=0.753) between groups A and B; however, the proportions of patients in group A with all grades of neutropenia (33% vs. 58%, P=0.013) and nausea/vomiting (11% vs. 29%, P=0.024) were significantly less compared to group B. A significant improvement in the global health and fatigue scores was recorded for group A post-chemotherapy compared to pre-chemotherapy (P<0.05). The fatigue, nausea/vomiting and appetite loss scores in group B were increased post-chemotherapy compared to pre-chemotherapy (P<0.05). In conclusion, intermittent tri-weekly DTX plus bicalutamide is well tolerated and has the potential to achieve comparable disease control with an improvement in QoL for patients with CRPC.

Multiple-treatments meta-analysis of chemotherapy and targeted therapies in advanced breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Many systemic nonhormonal regimens have been evaluated across several hundreds of randomized trials in advanced breast cancer. We aimed to quantify the relative merits of these regimens in prolonging survival.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of all trials that compared different regimens involving chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy in advanced breast cancer (1973-2007). Regimens were categorized a priori into different treatment types. We performed multiple-treatments meta-analysis and calculated hazard ratios for each treatment category relative to monotherapy with old agents (ie, regimens not including anthracyclines, anthracenediones, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, capecitabine, taxanes, marimastat, thalidomide, trastuzumab, lapatinib, or bevacizumab).

RESULTS

We identified 370 eligible randomized trials (54,189 patients), of which 172 (31,552 patients) compared different types of treatment. Survival data from 148 comparisons pertaining to 128 of the 172 trials (26,031 patients, 22 different types of treatment) were available for inclusion in the multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Compared with single-agent chemotherapy with old nonanthracycline drugs, anthracycline regimens achieved 22%-33% relative risk reductions in mortality (ie, hazard ratio [HR] for standard-dose anthracycline-based combination: 0.67, 95% credibility interval [CrI] 0.57-0.78). Several newer regimens achieved further benefits (eg, HR [95% CrI] 0.67 [0.55-0.81] for single-drug taxane, 0.64 [0.53-0.78] for combination of anthracyclines with taxane, 0.49 [0.37-0.67] for taxane-based combination with capecitabine or gemcitabine), and similar benefits were seen with several regimens including molecular targeted treatments. Most regimens had very similar efficacy profiles (<5% difference in HR) as first- and subsequent-line therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Stepwise improvements in efficacy of chemotherapy and targeted treatments cumulatively have achieved major improvements in the survival of patients with advanced breast cancer. Many options that can be used in first and subsequent lines of therapy have comparable efficacy profiles.

Intermittent chemotherapy for metastatic hormone refractory prostate cancer

While docetaxel/prednisone chemotherapy has demonstrated a survival advantage in metastatic hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients, the optimal duration of chemotherapy has not yet been established. Currently, a standard practice is to treat patients indefinitely until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. A systematic approach to providing breaks in treatment schedules (intermittent chemotherapy) for patients who experience an initial response to chemotherapy may avoid or delay the development of progressive toxicity. Whether continuous therapy offers an advantage over intermittent therapy, in terms of balancing disease control and overall survival with treatment-related toxicities and quality-of-life (QOL) is yet unanswered. This article will: (1) review the data from prior studies of intermittent versus continuous chemotherapy in other solid tumors, (2) review existing trials of intermittent chemotherapy in prostate cancer, (3) discuss intermittent chemotherapy clinical trial design considerations, and (4) discuss the future role of intermittent chemotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Surrogate markers and survival in women receiving first-line combination anthracycline chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer

Surrogate markers may help predict the effects of first-line treatment on survival. This metaregression analysis examines the relationship between several surrogate markers and survival in women with advanced breast cancer after receiving first-line combination anthracycline chemotherapy 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (FAC) or 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) . From a systematic literature review, we identified 42 randomised trials. The surrogate markers were complete or partial tumour response, progressive disease and time to progression. The treatment effect on survival was quantified by the hazard ratio. The treatment effect on each surrogate marker was quantified by the odds ratio (or ratio of median time to progression). The relationship between survival and each surrogate marker was assessed by a weighted linear regression of the hazard ratio against the odds ratio. There was a significant linear association between survival and complete or partial tumour response (P<0.001, R²=34%), complete tumour response (P=0.02, R²=12%), progressive disease (P<0.001, R²=38%) and time to progression (P<0.0001, R²=56%); R² is the proportion of the variability in the treatment effect on survival that is explained by the treatment effect on the surrogate marker. Time to progression may be a useful surrogate marker for predicting survival in women receiving first-line anthracycline chemotherapy and could be used to estimate the survival benefit in future trials of first-line chemotherapy compared to FAC or FEC. The other markers, tumour response and progressive disease, were less good.

Phase III Trial of Epirubicin Plus Paclitaxel Compared With Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide As First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Trial AB01

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of epirubicin and paclitaxel (EP) with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

Patients and Methods

Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy (except for adjuvant therapy) were randomly assigned to receive either EP (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2) or EC (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary outcome was progression-free survival; secondary outcome measures were overall survival, response rates, and toxicity.

Results

Between 1996 and 1999, 705 patients (353 EP patients and 352 EC patients) underwent random assignment. Patient characteristics were well matched between the two groups, and 71% of patients received six cycles of treatment. Objective response rates were 65% for the EP group and 55% for the EC group (P = .015). At the time of analysis, 641 patients (91%) had died. Median progression-free survival time was 7.0 months for the EP group and 7.1 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.24; P = .41), and median overall survival time was 13 months for the EP group and 14 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.19; P = .8). EP patients, compared with EC patients, had more grade 3 and 4 mucositis (6% v 2%, respectively; P = .0006) and grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity (5% v 1%, respectively; P < .0001).

Conclusion

In terms of progression-free survival and overall survival, there was no evidence of a difference between EP and EC. The data demonstrate no additional advantage to using EP instead of EC as first-line chemotherapy for MBC in taxane-naïve patients.

The role of the liposomal anthracyclines and other systemic therapies in the management of advanced breast cancer

For patients whose breast cancers are not responsive to endocrine therapy, there are a large number of cytotoxic drugs that will induce a response. In spite of the introduction of new, very active drugs such as the taxanes, vinorelbine, capecitabine, gemcitabine, and trastuzumab, the anthracyclines are still as active as any--and more active than most--drugs used to treat breast cancer. Their inclusion in combinations to treat early and advanced disease prolongs survival. However, they cause nausea, vomiting, alopecia, myelosuppression, mucositis, and cardiomyopathies. There is no evidence that increasing the dose of conventional anthracyclines or any other of the cytotoxics beyond standard doses will improve outcomes. Schedule may be more important than dose in determining the benefit of cytotoxics used to treat breast cancer. Weekly schedules and continuous infusions of 5-fluorouracil and doxorubicin may have some advantages over more intermittent schedules. Liposomal formations of doxorubicin reduce toxicity, including cardiotoxicity; theoretically they should also be more effective because of better targeting of tumor over normal tissues. Both pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil/Caelyx [PLD]) and liposomal doxorubicin (Myocet [NPLD]) appeared to be as effective as conventional doxorubicin and much less toxic in multiple phase II and phase III studies. PLD has been evaluated in combinations with cyclophosphamide, the taxanes, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, and trastuzumab, and NPLD has been evaluated in combination with cyclophosphamide and trastuzumab. Both liposomal anthracyclines are less cardiotoxic than conventional doxorubicin. The optimal dose of PLD is lower than that of conventional doxorubicin or NPLD. Patients treated with PLD have almost no alopecia, nausea, or vomiting, but its use is associated with stomatitis and hand-foot syndrome, which can be avoided or minimized with the use of proper dose-schedules. In contrast, the optimal dose-schedule of NPLD is nearly identical to that of conventional doxorubicin. The toxicity profile of NPLD is similar to that of conventional doxorubicin, but toxicities are less severe and NPLD is better tolerated than conventional doxorubicin at higher doses.

Antitumour antibiotic containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Antitumour antibiotics are used in the management of metastatic breast cancer. Some of these agents have demonstrated higher tumour response rates than non-antitumour antibiotic regimens, however a survival benefit has not been established in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and review the randomised evidence comparing anti-tumour antibiotic containing chemotherapy regimens with regimens not containing an anti-tumour antibiotic in the management of women with metastatic breast cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The specialised register maintained by the Editorial Base of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group was searched on 2nd May, 2003 using the codes for "advanced breast cancer" and "chemotherapy". Details of the search strategy and coding applied by the Group to create the register are described in the Group's module on The Cochrane Library.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing anti-tumour antibiotic containing regimens with regimens not containing anti-tumour antibiotics in women with metastatic breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected from published trials. Studies were assessed for eligibility and quality, and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived from time-to-event outcomes where possible, and a fixed effect model was used for meta-analysis. Response rates were analysed as dichotomous variables. Quality of life and toxicity data were extracted where present. A primary analysis was conducted for all trials and by class of antitumour antibiotic.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three trials reporting on 45 treatment comparisons were identified. All trials published results for tumour response and 26 trials published time-to-event data for overall survival. The observed 4084 deaths in 5284 randomised women did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in survival between regimens that contained antitumour antibiotics and those that did not (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03, P = 0.35) and no significant heterogeneity. Antitumour antibiotic regimens were favourably associated with time-to-progression (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91) and tumour response rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.48) although statistically significant heterogeneity was observed for these outcomes. These associations were consistent when the analysis was restricted to the 29 trials that reported on anthracyclines. Patients receiving anthracycline-containing regimens were also more likely to experience toxic events compared to patients receiving non-antitumour antibiotic regimens. No statistically significant difference was observed in any outcome between mitoxantrone-containing and non-antitumour antibiotic-containing regimens.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to regimens without antitumour antibiotics, regimens that contained these agents showed a statistically significant advantage for tumour response and time to progression in women with metastatic breast cancer but were not associated with an improvement in overall survival. The favourable effect on tumour response and time to progression observed in anthracycline-containing regimens was also associated with greater toxicity.

Randomized trial comparing cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) with rotational CMF, epirubicin and vincristine as primary chemotherapy in operable breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND

According to the overview of Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group, anthracycline containing regimens are superior to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) as adjuvant chemotherapy for breast carcinoma, but no comparative information is available in terms of primary chemotherapy. In the current randomized controlled trial, the authors compared CMF with a chemotherapy regimen including CMF, epirubicin, and vincristine (CMFEV).

METHODS

Two hundred eleven patients with Stages I and II palpable breast carcinoma and tumor diameter > 2.5 cm or < or = 2.5 cm with cytologically proven axillary lymph node involvement were randomized to receive CMF (arm A) or CMFEV regimen (arm B) for four cycles before surgery. After surgery, patients in both arms received adjuvant CMF for three cycles; the postmenopausal patients also received tamoxifen for two years.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the complete response (CR) and in the CR plus partial response (PR) rates between the two arms. In the subset analysis, among premenopausal patients, significantly higher rates of CR (26% vs 4%, P = 0.004) and of CR + PR rates (80% vs 54%, P = 0.007) were observed in the CMFEV, as compared to the CMF arm. Multivariate analysis confirmed the presence of a significant interaction between menopausal status and type of treatment on the probability of achieving CR (P = 0.02) or CR + PR (P = 0.01). There were no major differences in the side effects of the two treatments, with the exception of more frequent alopecia in the experimental arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study are in line with those of previous published randomized clinical trials comparing regimens without and with anthracycline as adjuvant treatment, indicating an agreement between the short term response to primary chemotherapy and the long term results observed in the adjuvant setting.

Does a drug do better when it is new?

BACKGROUND

When assessing a new, promising therapeutic approach, a clinician's perception of a drug's effectiveness may be shaped by different kinds of phenomena, and among them, a favorable attitude towards new treatments, and as a result a tendency to overestimate their efficacy (wish bias).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of published randomized clinical trials of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer was carried out. Global (complete plus partial) response rate over time with allowance for type of drug regimen (mono- or polychemotherapy) and prior adjuvant therapies was assessed in the doxorubicin-containing arm using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies published from 1975 to 1999 were retrieved for a total of 2234 women with advanced breast cancer enrolled in the doxorubicin-containing arms. There was a significant decrease in response rate to doxorubicin as first-line treatment over time that resisted adjustment for important differences in therapeutic management [odds ratio for global response = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.99].

CONCLUSIONS

Although only one drug (doxorubicin) in one clinical context (advanced breast cancer) has been analyzed, our findings support the use of double blind methodology whenever possible when assessing subjective endpoints and encourage further studies aimed at defining the clinical relevance of a wish bias in medicine.

Chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer: what to expect in 2001 and beyond

Chemotherapy plays an important role in the management of metastatic breast cancer. The anthracyclines (doxorubicin, epirubicin) and the taxanes (paclitaxel, docetaxel) are considered the most active agents for patients with advanced breast cancer. Traditionally, the anthracyclines have been used in combination with cyclophosphamide and 5-fluorouracil (FAC, FEC). The taxanes have single-agent activity similar to older combination chemotherapy treatments. There is great interest in developing anthracycline/taxane combinations. Capecitabine is indicated for patients who progress after anthracycline and taxane therapy. Vinorelbine and gemcitabine have activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer and are commonly used as third- and fourth-line palliative therapy. The role of high-dose chemotherapy is not well-defined and remains experimental. Novel cytotoxic therapy strategies include the development of anthracycline, taxane, and oral fluoropyrimidine analogues; antifolates; topoisomerase I inhibitors, and multidrug resistance inhibitors. A better understanding of the biology of breast cancer is providing novel treatment approaches. Oncogenes and tumor-supressor genes are emerging as important targets for therapy. Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the Her-2/neu protein, has been shown to prolong survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Other novel biologic therapies interfere with signal transduction pathways and angiogenesis. The challenge for the next decade will be to integrate these promising agents in the management of metastatic and primary breast cancer.

Paclitaxel-induced remission in docetaxel-refractory anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer

Paclitaxel and docetaxel are excellent agents with a high antitumor effect for the treatment of previously anthracycline-exposed metastatic breast cancer. There has been no standard treatment for patients who undergo therapy of a taxan-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Paclitaxel has partial non-cross-resistance in vitro with docetaxel in inhibiting microtubule disaggregation. We present the case of a patient with docetaxel-refractory anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer who achieved remission with paclitaxel.

Initial paclitaxel improves outcome compared with CMFP combination chemotherapy as front-line therapy in untreated metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the place of single-agent paclitaxel compared with nonanthracycline combination chemotherapy as front-line therapy in metastatic breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with previously untreated metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) over 3 hours for eight cycles (24 weeks) or standard cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m(2)/d orally on days 1 to 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8, fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8, and prednisone 40 mg/m(2)/d orally on days 1 to 14 (CMFP) for six cycles (24 weeks) with epirubicin recommended as second-line therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 209 eligible patients were randomized with a median survival duration of 17.3 months for paclitaxel and 13.9 months for CMFP. Multivariate analysis showed that patients who received paclitaxel survived significantly longer than those who received CMFP (P =.025). Paclitaxel produced significantly less severe leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, mucositis, documented infections (all P <.001), nausea or vomiting (P =.003), and fever without documented infection (P =.007), and less hospitalization for febrile neutropenia than did CMFP (P =.001). Alopecia, peripheral neuropathy, and myalgia or arthralgia were more severe with paclitaxel (all P <.0001). Overall, quality of life was similar for both treatments (P > = .07).

CONCLUSION

Initial paclitaxel was associated with significantly less myelosuppression and fewer infections, with longer survival and similar quality of life and control of metastatic breast cancer compared with CMFP.

Doxorubicin versus methotrexate both combined with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil and tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer--a randomised study with more than 10 years follow-up from the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG)

To evaluate the substitution of methotrexate with doxorubicin (Dox) in CMF-(cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) containing regimen for advanced breast cancer, 415 postmenopausal patients below the age of 66 years, naïve to chemotherapy, were accrued from 1980 to 1984 and followed-up until 1995. They received tamoxifen 30 mg daily orally and by randomisation either 400 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide, 25 mg/m2 doxorubicin and 500 mg/m2 5-fluorouracil (CAF) or 40 mg/m2 methotrexate instead of Dox (CMF) intravenously (i.v.) days 1 + 8 repeated every 4 weeks. Dox was substituted by methotrexate at a cumulative dose of 550 mg/m2. Among 341 eligible patients the response rate and median time to progression was significantly in favour of CAF: 53% CAF versus 36% CMF (P = 0.002) and 11.8 months CAF versus 6.5 months CMF (P = 0.001). Median duration of response was 19.5 CAF versus 18.0 CMF months, and survival 20.8 CAF versus 17.4 CMF months (non-significant). The two regimens were equimyelotoxic. There were no treatment-related fatalities but 1 patient with congestive heart failure on CAF was reported. Nausea/vomiting, stomatitis and infections were modest in both groups, whilst alopecia was more common with CAF. Regression analysis showed that long recurrence free interval, good performance status, and no visceral involvement was significantly related to long-term survival, whilst the treatment regimen was not. It is concluded that in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced breast cancer Dox-containing regimens are superior and remain the first choice of chemotherapy, especially in patients with visceral metastases, until newer drugs and combinations have been proven to be superior.

Modulating effect of lonidamine on response to doxorubicin in metastatic breast cancer patients: results from a multicenter prospective randomized trial

Previous results from our preclinical studies have shown that lonidamine (LND) can positively modulate the antiproliferative activity of doxorubicin (DOX) on breast cancer cell lines. To evaluate the effect of LND in a clinical setting, a multicenter randomized trial was carried out on patients with advanced breast cancer. From September 1991 to July 1993, 181 patients were enrolled in the trial and received an initial treatment of DOX at 75 mg/m2 for 3 cycles. The 137 patients who reached complete remission, partial remission, or stable disease were randomized to receive either DOX alone (75 mg/m2 day 1) (arm A) or DOX plus LND (600 mg orally/day) (arm B). The patients enrolled in the two arms were fairly homogeneous in terms of major clinical characteristics. Toxicity was similar in both arms except for myalgia: WHO grade > or=2 was observed in 57% of arm B patients. Overall response rate to DOX + LND was 50% and to DOX alone 38% in evaluable patients, and 48% vs 37% in all registered patients, as determined by an intention-to-treat analysis. The differences did not reach statistical significance. Conversely, in agreement with previous findings, we observed a significant difference in response rate in the subgroup of patients with liver metastases, regardless of the extent of hepatic involvement (DOX + LND 68% vs DOX 33%, p=0.03). This observation makes LND an important tool in association with anthracyclines in the treatment of this subgroup of patients.

Impact of patient characteristics on treatment outcome: anthracycline resistance

In the treatment of breast cancer, anthracycline-containing combinations are frequently used as adjuvant therapy or to treat patients with metastatic disease. However, most patients with metastatic disease who are treated with these combinations develop progressive disease and a significant proportion of patients, after receiving anthracycline-containing adjuvant therapy, experience recurrent disease. Patients who develop recurrent disease while receiving adjuvant therapy and those whose metastatic disease progresses without an objective response while on treatment to control the disease, are among those defined as having primary refractory disease. These patients have a poor prognosis. In other patients whose breast cancer is treated with anthracycline-containing combinations, defining the degree of resistance requires careful consideration of the type of response to therapy (complete response, partial response or no change in disease status) the duration of response and, for patients in the adjuvant setting, the length of the disease-free interval.

A Combination Therapy with Mitomycin C, Etoposide, Doxifluridine and Medroxyprogesterone Acetate as Second Line Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer Refractory to Combination Chemotherapy of Cyclo-phoshamide, Doxorubicin and 5-Fluorouracil

Thirty-two patients with advanced breast cancer refractory to combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (CPA), doxorubicin (ADR) and 5-fluorouracil (5-EU) (CAF) were treated with the combination of mitomycin C, etoposide, doxifluridine and medroxyprogesterone acetate as second line therapy. Observed responses included 6 patients (18.7%) with complete response (CR) and 7 (21.9%) with partial response (PR). Two (50%) out of 4 patients who had bone pain due to bone metastasis noted pain relief. CR or PR were obtained in 4 out of 12 patients who had not responded to the previous CAF therapy. While grade III myelosuppression was observed in 3 patients, other adverse effects were minimal. It is suggested that this combination therapy may be recommended for advanced breast cancer patients as a second therapy.

Controversies in Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND: A large number of controversies about the management of breast cancer produce uncertainties for patients and physicians alike. In addition, questions are constantly raised about the true value of new approaches or treatments. METHODS: The authors have conducted a critical review of the literature on several of these issues, and they present a balanced view that can be useful for clinical decision making. RESULTS: Although new staging systems for ductal carcinoma in situ have been proposed, a consensus has not yet been reached regarding the criteria to allow tumor excision alone. The extent of benefit of the main adjuvant therapies is becoming better established, and improvement in outcomes may accrue from dose-intensive treatments and autologous stem cell or hematopoietic growth factor support. CONCLUSIONS: Progress in breast cancer management continues to evolve. Several new approaches either reduce morbidity or improve outcomes.

Doubling epirubicin dose intensity (100 mg/m2 versus 50 mg/m2) in the FEC regimen significantly increases response rates. An international randomised phase III study in metastatic breast cancer. The Epirubicin High Dose (HEPI 010) Study Group

PURPOSE

A phase III study was performed in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) to evaluate the effect on response rate and survival of a doubling of the epirubicin dose intensity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four hundred fifty-six patients were randomised to receive either epirubicin 100 mg/m2 or 50 mg/m2 in combination with 5-FU (500 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2) (FEC 100 vs. FEC 50) i.v., every 21 days for a maximum of six cycles (eight in case of CR).

RESULTS

Of 456 patients, 390 were evaluable for efficacy. Objective response (CR + PR) was seen in 57% (FEC 100) vs. 41% (FEC 50) of the evaluable patients (P = 0.003). The CR rate was higher in the FEC 100 arm (12% vs. 7%, P = 0.07). FEC 100 produced significantly higher response rates in patients with visceral localisation (50% vs. 34%, P = 0.011) and in patients with more than two metastatic organ sites (64% vs. 37%, P = 0.001). Median time to progression (7.6 vs. 7 months) and overall survival (18 months vs. 17 months) were similar. Myelosuppression was the principal toxic effect, with grade IV neutropenia observed in 57% of the patients treated with FEC 100 vs. 9% of those on FEC 50. Grade IV infection or febrile neutropenia were observed in 8% (FEC 100) vs. 0.4% (FEC 50), but the incidence of septic death was the same in the two arms (two patients each). Cardiac toxicity was similar in the two treatment groups, with 5% vs. 3% of the patients taken off study due to cardiac events, primarily due to a decline in LVEF. Only three patients (two in FEC 100) experienced congestive heart failure.

CONCLUSION

This trial shows that FEC with epirubicin at 100 mg/m2 can be administered for repeated cycles without bone marrow support with increased, though acceptable, toxicity and with a significant increase of antitumor effect (especially in visceral and/or high-burden disease), but no increased survival.

A risk-benefit assessment of anthracycline antibiotics in antineoplastic therapy

The anthracycline antibiotics comprise a group of cytotoxic compounds with wide-ranging activity against human malignancies. They are used extensively for curative, adjuvant and palliative therapy, both as single agents and in combination regimens. They produce a number of adverse effects, some of which are shared by other cytotoxic drugs. The most important adverse effect is cardiotoxicity, which is unique to this class of compounds. Strategies have been devised to circumvent these adverse effects, including the development of less toxic analogues, alterations in scheduling, the addition of cardioprotectant agents and methods of monitoring for cardiac abnormalities.

A multicentre phase II study of the efficacy and safety of docetaxel as first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer: report of the Clinical Screening Group of the EORTC

BACKGROUND

Two previous phase II trials of docetaxels as first line chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer have been conducted by the Clinical Screening Group of the EORTC. In these 2 studies, docetaxel 100 mg/m2 and 75 mg/m2 were administered without routine premedication and produced overall response rates of 68% and 52% respectively. Fluid retention was the most problematic adverse event in these 2 studies in which premedication was not routinely administered. This study investigated the efficacy and safety profile of docetaxel with a 1-day prophylactic premedication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Docetaxel 100 mg/m2 was administered intravenously over 1 hour, every 3 weeks, to 37 women (aged 29-65 years) with advanced breast cancer. A 1-day regimen of intravenous antihistamine and oral corticosteroids was given with each dose. Full doses of docetaxel were administered in 179 of 200 cycles (89.5%), giving a median relative dose intensity of 0.98.

RESULTS

Tumour regression was achieved in 25 patients (7.66%) after a median of 7 weeks, and 2 patients (5.4%) had a complete response. Response rates were 67.9% in patients with visceral metastases, 76.9% in liver metastases and 83.3% in patients with > 2 organs involved. The median time to progression was 31 weeks (range 1-36+). After a median follow-up time of 6.9 months (range 4.6-9.4), 31 patients (83.7%) were still alive. The most common adverse events (AE) were neutropenia (97%), alopecia (97%, grade 1-2), fluid retention (89%, mainly mild to moderate) and neurosensory disorders (81%, mainly mild to moderate). Only 5 patients experienced febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalisation and/or antibiotic therapy. Sixteen patients discontinued treatment because of fluid retention; nevertheless, 13 of these achieved an objective antitumour response and none had any significant deterioration in performance status. AEs were generally reversible and easily managed, and there were no deaths attributable to docetaxel-related AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Docetaxel produces very effective tumour response with acceptable tolerability when used as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer. The 1-day premedication regimen used in this study was less effective in reducing the incidence and severity or delaying the onset of fluid retention than the currently recommended 5-day corticosteroid premedication. The optimum premedication regimen remains to be defined.

Randomised phase II study of epirubicin-vindesine versus mitoxantrone-vindesine in metastatic breast cancer

The purpose of this study was to compare the activity and toxicity of epirubicin-vindesine (EV) with mitoxantrone-vindesine (MV) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. A total of 295 patients was randomly allocated to treatment with vindesine 3 mg/m2 combined with either epirubicin 40 mg/m2 or mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2. All drugs were given by intravenous push, treatment cycles were repeated at 3-4 week intervals. 255 patients were available for response, and 283 for toxicity. EV and MV yielded similar objective response rates (34 and 26%, respectively), response durations, times to progression and survival. Median time to remission was 1.8 and 3.1 months (P = 0.006) with EV and MV, respectively. In patients with visceral metastases, response rate was higher with EV than MV (40 versus 23%; P = 0.03). Patients receiving MV had less nausea/vomiting (P = 0.007) and alopecia (P = < 0.001) of WHO grade > or = 2. Bone marrow, cardiac and other toxicities were mild with both treatments. The observed differences in activity and toxicity between the two regimens appear to have clinical relevance. EV proved to be more active in visceral disease and to be able to induce remissions more rapidly. Accordingly, patients with visceral metastases or severe tumour-related symptoms may benefit from epirubicin-based treatment. Subjective toxicities, i.e. nausea/vomiting and alopecia, were less frequent and severe with MV. Thus, MV may prove useful in patients with more indolent disease and appears to warrant phase III evaluation in such patients.

A phase III randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, and 5-fluorouracil (CNF) versus cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) in patients with metastatic breast cancer

One hundred patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomly selected to receive combined chemotherapy treatment with adriamycin (50 mg/m2) or mitoxantrone (12 mg/m2) associated with 5-fluorouracil (600 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 21 days with a maximum of ten cycles. All patients included in this study were under 75 years of age and had ECOG performance status of less than 4. They had not been treated previously with chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, which could not have included anthracyclines, had to have relapsed at least 12 months after the completion of therapy. There were no statistically significant differences in pretreatment characteristics or metastatic disease location between the two groups. Ninety-four patients were assessable for response. No differences were observed in response rate or in survival between the groups. The response rate (complete response (CR) and partial response (PR)) was 68% (13% CR and 55% PR for CAF; 0% CR and 68% PR for CNF). Median survival for all patients was 19 months (18 months with CAF and 19 months with CNF). All patients were assessable for toxicity. There were no differences in gastrointestinal and cardiac toxicity. More grade I-II hematologic toxicity episodes (p < 0.001) and treatment delays (p = 0.05) due to leucopenia were observed with the CNF group, and more grade III alopecia (p < 0.001) was observed with the CAF group. Patients received further therapeutic manoeuvres after finishing the study with a sequential treatment consisting of hormonal therapy and chemotherapy with mitomycin (M) -vinblastine (Vbl) (M 10 mg/m2 day 1, Vbl 5 mg/m2 days 1, 15 and 29; maximum 5 cycles). This chemotherapy treatment was received by 32 patients, with a response rate of 34% and grade III-IV hematologic toxicity of 37%. Treatment with CNF can be considered a good alternative to CAF for first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. M-Vbl treatment is useful as second-line treatment in patients with prior adriamycin exposure.

Chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer: outcome and prognostic factors

The outcome for 758 consecutive patients who had received one or more chemotherapy regimens for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer is presented. The response rate following first line treatment was 34%. Median duration of response was 7.8 months, median time to progression was 3.7 months and median survival was 7.9 months. The only factor predicting for response, of factors recorded at presentation and at initiation of chemotherapy, was the use of anthracycline based regimens, though this may reflect the patient selection policy. Initial disease free interval, presence of liver metastases and use of anthracyclines were significantly related to time to progression. Several factors related to survival following first chemotherapy, but anthracycline usage showed only a very weak correlation. One third of patients (249/758) received two or more chemotherapy regimens. The response rate (16%) and median time to progression (2.3 months) were significantly worse than for first line treatment. The outcome after third line chemotherapy was very similar to that observed following second line treatment. Achievement of an objective response with first line chemotherapy predicted for second response, but with insufficient power to be of use in selecting patients for subsequent chemotherapy. Time to progression following first line chemotherapy did not influence that after second line treatment.

Chemotherapy and survival in advanced breast cancer: the inclusion of doxorubicin in Cooper type regimens

The value of the inclusion of doxorubicin hydrochloride (dox) in Cooper type regimens in advanced breast cancer was assessed by performing an overview employing summary statistics derived from published papers of randomised clinical trials comparing Cooper type regimens that contain dox with regimens in which dox was replaced by one or more compounds. Trials were selected which published data on survival, time to treatment failure and response rate. This study suggests that dox confers advantages on all of these endpoints and that the size of such benefits needs to be taken into account when deciding whether to use dox.

Decreased efficacy of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil in metastatic breast cancer when reducing treatment duration from 18 to 6 months

The impact of treatment duration on survival and progression-free survival is uncertain in metastatic breast cancer. In this trial 359 patients were randomised to receive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil (CEF) once every 3 weeks for a maximum of 18 months or identical chemotherapy for a maximum of 6 months. Following progressive disease (PD) or severe toxicity CEF was discontinued before the scheduled maximum duration. A second series of CEF continued for a maximum of 12 months was offered to patients with PD more than 3 weeks after completing a maximum of 6 months of CEF. Both groups received tamoxifen (30 mg daily) until PD, and premenopausal patients also received ovarian irradiation. After 6 months 254 evaluable patients were unprogressive. Survival and progression-free survival were significantly longer in 127 patients continuing CEF than in 127 patients interrupting CEF at 6 months (chi 2 = 17.6, P = 0.00003 and chi 2 = 4.7, P = 0.03, respectively). The results of the second series of CEF were discouraging with only one complete response in 44 evaluable patients. In conclusion, prolonged chemotherapy for 18 months is superior to identical chemotherapy for 6 months in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

Breast cancer: chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced disease

Chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer remains palliative. Although the majority of patients will experience an initial response or stabilisation of the disease, the survival is only modestly improved. The search for new drugs and more effective combinations must therefore continue. High-dose chemotherapy with or without autologous bone marrow transplant (ABMT) is an enthusiastic perspective of progress but the available data do not permit conclusions about the effectiveness of high-dose therapy compared with conventional treatment.

Present status of anthracyclines in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer

Anthracyclines represent the most active cytotoxic agents against metastatic breast cancer. The introduction of these drugs into the adjuvant therapy of breast cancer was slow because of concern related to chronic toxicities. However, there is clinical evidence of the safety and efficacy of doxorubicin-containing adjuvant regimens with follow-up periods that now approach 19 years. Adjuvant chemotherapy trials performed at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center demonstrate that doxorubicin can be administered in the adjuvant setting with tolerable and reversible acute side effects, and minimal long term toxicity. Over the last 15 years, a number of prospective randomised trials have compared doxorubicin-containing regimens versus those not containing doxorubicin in the adjuvant therapy of early breast cancer. Several of these trials have demonstrated disease-free survival benefit of the doxorubicin-containing regimens; some have also shown a definite overall survival gain. Several other trials in progress will need additional follow-up for definitive analysis. Thus, doxorubicin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is effective, tolerable, and safe for adjuvant therapy of breast cancer.

Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and fluorouracil (CAF) plus depo-buserelin in the treatment of premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer

A phase II study was undertaken to assess the effect of CAF plus depo-buserelin, as first-line treatment, in premenopausal women with breast cancer. Of 66 patients entered 60 are eligible and evaluable; their median age was 45, estrogen receptor (ER) was positive in 9, negative in 11 and unknown in 40. The median disease free interval (DFI) was 11 months. Metastatic sites were visceral in 14, bone in 34 and soft tissue in 37. Twenty-nine patients had metastatic disease of one site, while 31 had 2-4 sites. An objective response of 82% was documented (29 complete responders and 20 partial responders). Median time to treatment failure was 11.5 months and median survival 37 months. Most commonly encountered side effects attributable to CAF were alopecia, nausea and vomiting, leucopenia and thrombocytopenia. Side effects attributable to buserelin were hot flashes. After one cycle baseline mean serum estradiol fell from premenopausal levels to postmenopausal levels. This study showed that CAF plus buserelin is well tolerated, with a very high response rate in selected premenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer.

Randomized trial of adjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer comparing i.v. CMF to an epirubicin-containing regimen [see comment]

From January 1985 to December 1987, 228 women with breast cancer smaller than 3 cm were treated by surgery +/- radiotherapy. All of them had axillary node involvement (N+) and/or lacked estrogen and progesterone steroid receptors (EPR-). They were randomized in an adjuvant chemotherapy trial comparing 9 intravenous CMF courses (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5FU)--113 patients--to a polychemotherapy consisting of 3 courses of MTV (mitomycin C, thiotepa, vindesine) plus 3 courses of EVM (epirubicin, vincristine, methotrexate)--115 patients. Prognostic factors were well balanced between the two treatment groups. With a 59-month median follow-up, local breast relapses are more frequent in the CMF group, but regional and metastatic recurrences are the same in the two groups. Overall survival is identical. Toxicity is different: alopecia and neurotoxicity are more frequent in the MTV+EVM group, but general and digestive toxicities are equivalent. Haematologic toxicity is greater in the CMF group, requiring more frequent dosage reductions.

Site-specific effect of chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer

The efficacy of cytotoxic therapy in different anatomical sites can be studied by analyzing the anatomical distribution of recurrences following adjuvant therapy or the rate of response according to site of metastasis. Cumulated data from 7 adjuvant studies showed that the relative reduction in the rate of recurrence was 37% for local and regional recurrences versus 25% for distant metastases. There are only sparse and inconclusive data concerning the anatomical pattern of recurrence according to type of adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, the majority of trials have not demonstrated significant differences in distribution of metastases in patients receiving different types of adjuvant systemic therapy. The available data on the rate of response in relation to metastatic site showed higher response rates in soft tissue metastases (55%), compared to visceral and bone metastases (40%). Cumulated data from 12 trials showed no differences in response rates between different soft tissue lesions (skin, subcutaneous tissue, lymph nodes, breast), or between metastases demonstrated by paraclinical tests (lung, liver, bone). However, there was a tendency for soft tissue lesions to have a higher response rate (55-60%) than visceral and bone metastases (31-44%). The reason for the observed differences is unknown. At the time of diagnosis soft tissue lesions may be smaller (with better blood supply) than visceral lesions. This might increase the likelihood of response, since experimental data show that the response rate is inversely correlated with tumour burden and tumour size. Another explanation is based on the hypothesis of site-specific clonal selection of tumour cells, which differ with respect to sensitivity to cytotoxic agents. However, the observed differences can also be ascribed to methodological errors or differences in assessing response of tumours at specific sites. Thus, the false positive response rate in soft tissue lesions, evaluated by physical examination, is approximately 20% compared with less than 10% in lung lesions evaluated by x-rays.

Cytotoxic treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Which drugs and drug combinations to use?

Although the optimal efficacy of cytotoxic therapy plateaued in the 1970s, no consensus yet exists regarding which cytotoxic combination to offer as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Comparison of a combination of CAF/CEF with other cytotoxic combinations reveals that an anthracycline-containing regimen not only increases response rate, but also improves time to progression and survival. Regarding appropriate duration of cytotoxic therapy, randomized trials indicate that therapy in excess of 6 months is beneficial. Although the main objective of cytotoxic therapy in patients with metastatic disease is to palliate symptoms at the least toxic cost, the finding that adjuvant cytotoxic therapy improves survival provides a clinical and ethical rational for continued research into new drugs and combinations in the hope that new strategies can be employed not only against metastatic breast cancer but may be applied with benefit also in the adjuvant situation.

Systemic therapy of advanced breast cancer

Many cytotoxic agents have demonstrated activity in advanced breast cancer, the more active agents being cyclophosphamide and the anthracyclines doxorubicin and epirubicin. Combinations of drugs are generally superior to single agents in terms of response rate, duration of response and survival. The treatment of advanced breast cancer can be continued either until treatment failure, or for a limited time from either initiation of therapy or from the observation of complete response. Although these are issues of significant concern, data from randomised trials are limited, and so the question of optimal treatment duration remains open. Randomised trials comparing regimens that differ by a dose intensity factor of less than 2 have failed to demonstrate significant differences in efficacy between the dose levels. With higher doses, as applied in combination with colony-stimulating factors and bone marrow transplantation, response rates seem to increase, but whether this translates into improved survival has not yet been answered by the results of randomised trials. Approximately 30% of patients respond to endocrine therapy. From the results of randomised trials, which have compared the efficacies and toxicities of different endocrine modalities including combined endocrine therapy, single-agent tamoxifen is generally considered as the preferred first-line treatment, leaving progestins and aromatase inhibitors as alternatives for second-line endocrine therapy in responders. In the majority of trials, chemotherapy combined with endocrine therapy has given improved response rates compared with chemotherapy alone, but the differences have not generally been translated into prolonged survival with combined modalities. This gives rise to the question of the optimal sequence of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, a subject needing further evaluation in future trials.

Medical management of early-stage breast cancer

With improved screening and education, a greater proportion of breast cancer is detected at an early stage. Although the prognosis for many of these patients is excellent following definitive local therapy alone, some subsets of node-negative patients have a 30% chance of eventually developing metastatic disease that will be incurable with current therapy. Thus, an increasing proportion of early-stage patients are being offered some form of adjuvant therapy, with the expectation of improved relapse-free survival, and possibly improved overall survival. Efforts have been made to base the selection of patients for adjuvant therapy on specific prognostic factors. Meanwhile, the scope and complexity of putative prognostic factors continues to widen, and now includes such items as the presence of occult microscopic metastases, DNA ploidy and proliferative fraction, cytogenetic abnormalities, oncogene expression, growth factor receptors, and expression of hormonally regulated proteins. In addition, there is now a considerable range of options with regard to the composition, dose intensity, and sequence of multimodality therapy. Data regarding the classification, significance, and interpretation of prognostic factors is reviewed together with the development, current status, and recommendations regarding adjuvant therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer. For 1991, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has estimated that 175,000 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed in American women. It is also estimated that 44,500 women will die of breast cancer. Unfortunately, the age-adjusted death rate from breast cancer has shown no overall change from 1930 through 1987. However, effective screening techniques continue to identify an increasing percentage of early-stage tumors, which should exceed 50% of all new tumors in 1991. Ultimately, our understanding of environmental and genetic risk factors may identify new ways to reduce the impact of this disease. In the interim, development and application of effective systemic adjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal therapy has become increasingly important. There is no question that a greater proportion of patients with less extensive disease are now being offered some form of adjuvant therapy. Meanwhile, selection of patients for adjuvant therapy, and choice among specific adjuvant regimens, has remained controversial. Analysis of multiple prognostic factors is performed not only in the context of cooperative investigational trials, but more often in the offices of individual physicians caring for individual patients. Tumor biopsies can now be routinely sent to specialized laboratories for performance of complex assays with potential prognostic information, although interpretation of these results with reference to a specific patient is often uncertain.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Comprehensive management of disseminated breast cancer

The management of patients with metastatic breast cancer is best achieved by the judicious use of local and systemic measures that palliate symptoms and improve overall quality of life. When two treatment approaches are known to be equally efficacious, the less toxic should be used. When disease is limited to one or two sites and the patient has an indolent form of the disease, the patient's symptoms are often best palliated with the use of surgery or radiotherapy alone. When multiple sites of disease are evident or the disease is progressing more rapidly, systemic therapy is preferred, and local therapies should be added when the patient is clearly refractory to systemic therapy or when the disease site is unlikely to be adequately palliated with systemic therapy. The use of any of these therapies, including chemotherapy, has a relatively small effect on the median survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer. However, improvements in quality of life are usually greatest with regimens inducing the highest response rates, even when these regimens are associated with greater toxicity. The characteristics of patients likely to respond to endocrine therapy are well defined; in these patients endocrine therapy should be used as the first form of systemic therapy. Among endocrine therapies, the least toxic is used first. The selection of patients for chemotherapy is largely a process of exclusion. When chemotherapy is used, there are a number of different strategies for sequencing chemotherapy that appear to be equally efficacious. In general, patients should be treated with standard doses of drug combinations for a period in excess of 3 months. When used inappropriately, especially in asymptomatic patients, these therapies may actually compromise the patient's quality of life. The use of surgery, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy should be integrated with various types of psychosupport services, especially peer support groups. Patients who want to try new forms of therapy should do so early in the course of the disease when these therapies are most likely to be effective and the patient has the least to lose if the therapy proves ineffective. This is especially true because the use of the most effective regimens at a time when the patient is asymptomatic may mean that the patient is resistant to most or all therapies of proven value when most in need of palliation.

Isolation and characterization of an adriamycin-resistant breast tumor cell line

An adriamycin-resistant human breast tumor cell line MDA-A1R was generated by step-wise selection in increasing concentrations of drug from the parent cell line MDA-MB-231. MDA-A1R cells grow as loosely attached cell aggregates with a doubling time of 28-32 h; the MDA-MB-231 parent cell line grows as a standard monolayer culture with a 20-h doubling time. The MDA-A1R cell line is highly resistant to adriamycin compared to the parent cell line, and is cross-resistant to velban and colchicine suggestive of a multidrug resistance (MDR) phenotype. MDA-A1R cells exhibit reduced net adriamycin content as compared to the parent cell line. The MDR-associated P-glycoprotein gene is amplified approximately 10- to 30-fold in MDA-A1R cells. P-glycoprotein sequences are overexpressed in the resistant cells and are stable for up to 13 wk after drug removal. Moreover, MDA-A1R cells show the presence of very high levels of P-glycoprotein. MDA-A1R is thus an in vitro model system to study the mechanism of MDR in human breast cancer.

Distant recurrence in breast cancer. Survival expectations and first choice of chemotherapy regimen

Controversial questions in recurrent breast cancer include the magnitude of the survival benefit of combination chemotherapy and the best choice of first line chemotherapy. Data from the files of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) show that with current systemic treatment median survival after distant recurrence is 19 months. Since historical data from the pre-chemotherapy era indicate a median survival of 12 months, the survival benefit of standard chemotherapy appears to be around 7 months in the average patient. The DBCG trial 80-R2 is the largest randomized trial of CAF (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil) versus CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) in recurrent breast cancer. A review of this study and 6 other similar studies shows that CAF is clearly superior to CMF in terms of better tumor shrinkage, prolonged overall time to progression, and decreased need of secondary therapy. The adverse effects of the two treatments are largely comparable, but CAF causes severe alopecia and is more expensive than CMF. On balance, the existing evidence indicates that CAF rather than CMF should be chosen as first line chemotherapy in recurrent breast cancer.

A randomized study of intensive versus moderate chemotherapy programs in metastatic breast cancer

Two intensive chemotherapy regimens CFPMV (Cytoxan [cyclophosphamide], 5-fluorouracil, prednisone, methotrexate, vincristine) and CA (Cytoxan, Adriamycin [doxorubicin]) were tested against a moderate regimen, CFP, in a prospective three-arm, randomized study with crossover when relapse or failure occurred, in order to assess whether the response, duration of remission, and survival can be altered by using more intensive regimens as first-line or as rescue therapy. All three regimens were equally effective as initial chemotherapy: CFP 26/46 (57%); CFPMV 31/48 (65%) and CA 26/47 (55%) (P = 0.61) with the least toxicity for the CFP regimen. Median duration of remission were 9.5, 11, and 9 months, respectively. Complete responses were almost identical in all three regimens: 4/46 (9%); 6/48 (12%) and 5/47 (11%) (P = 0.94). CFPMV was an effective regimen as second-line therapy: 11/33 (33%) or third-line therapy: 7/21 (33%). The CA regimen was equally effective as second-line therapy: 8/25 (32%), suggesting that intensive regimens provide an effective rescue therapy, as well in previous responders as in nonresponders. Initial intensive regimens have not substantially altered long-term survival in the whole group of treated patients, Arm II (CFPMV----CA----CFP) 17.6 months; Arm III (CA----CFP----CFPMV) 12.3 months when compared with initial moderate regimens Arm I (CFP----CFPMV----CA) 16.6 months (P = 0.24). The same lack of difference in survival was noticed in responder patients in each arm: Arm II 19.0 months; Arm III 16.0 months versus Arm I 22.0 months (P = 0.13). Our data suggest that a moderate regimen is as effective as more intense regimens for induction therapy in metastatic breast cancer, with less toxicity, preserving the opportunity for an effective rescue therapy with intensive regimens in second or third-line chemotherapy.