Chemotherapy with and without anthracycline

Role of chemotherapy in breast cancer

Breast cancer represents a major health problem, with more than a million new cases and 370,000 deaths worldwide yearly. Options and understanding of how to use cytotoxic chemotherapy in both advanced and early stage breast cancer have made substantial progress in the past 10 years, with numerous landmark studies identifying clear survival benefits for newer approaches. Despite this research, the optimal approach for any individual patient cannot be determined from a literature review or decision-making algorithm alone. Treatment choices are still predominantly based on practice determined by individual or collective experience and the historic development of treatment within a locality. In many situations treatment decisions cannot be divorced from economic considerations. Blanket application of international, national or local guidelines is usually impractical or inappropriate and careful consideration of the detailed circumstances of each patient is required to make optimal use of available options. Recent research has allowed us to refine breast cancers further into prognostic groups based on a gene expression profile. Clinical trials to prove the value of this approach are currently being designed. This review discusses the evidence for various chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant and metastatic settings, and examines the current evidence for the timing of radiotherapy in the adjuvant setting.

Histopathologic and Metabolic Criteria for Assessment of Treatment Response in Breast Cancer

Increasing use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer necessitates methods for evaluation of therapeutic response. Histopathology provides accurate assessment of treatment efficacy but only approximately 20% of breast cancer patients achieve complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, methods that predict therapeutic effectiveness could help individualize treatment and avoid ineffective chemotherapies. Metabolic imaging using positron emission tomography (PET) and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) seems to provide early response assessment in vivo. Change in FDG uptake after chemotherapy initiation correlates with histopathologic response after completion. PET response assessment criteria and imaging protocols need to be developed and validated. This article compares complementary approaches for assessment of treatment response, namely histologic features of the tumor on the microscopic level versus in vivo metabolic changes on a macroscopic level.

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.