Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer

PURPOSE

To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.

Abstract OT1-02-04: SWOG S1418/NRG -BR006: A randomized, phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MK-3475 as adjuvant therapy for triple receptor-negative breast cancer with &gt; 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (&gt;pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Background: Patients with residual cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, particularly triple negative cancers (TNBC), have poor prognosis.The SWOG S1418 / NRG BR-006 (NCT02954874) randomized, phase III trial tests the hypothesis that administration of pembrolizumab after surgery for 12 months will reduce invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) by 33% compared to observation in patients with TNBC and &gt; 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (&gt;pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods: Eligible patients ≥18 years old with triple negative breast cancer defined by ASCO/CAP guidelines and &gt;1 cm residual invasive cancer in the breast, or any macrometastases in the lymph nodes after completion of 16-24 weeks of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients may receive post-operative chemotherapy for up to 24 weeks but must be registered for screening within 35 days of completion of adjuvant chemo. Completion of radiation therapy prior to registration is allowed, but it is preferred that patients receive radiation after randomization; patients randomized to pembrolizumab will receive their XRT concomitant with pembrolizumab. Adequate organ functions: ANC &gt; 1.5, PLT &gt; 100, Hgb &gt; 9, normal creatinine, Tbili &lt; 1.5 IUNL, AST/ALT/AlkPhos &lt; 2.5 IULN. HIV with good CD4 count is allowed. Active autoimmune disease, Hep B,C, prior immunotherapy, active immunosuppressive therapy, or live vaccines within 30 days of registration are not allowed. Five unstained slides for PDL1 staining are required for stratification. The study has a dual primary endpoint; comparison of IDFS between arms in (i) all randomized patients (1-sided a=0.01) and in PDL-1 positive patients (1-sided a=0.015). Secondary endpoints include toxicity, overall survival, distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) and quality of life measures. Patients will be randomized 1:1 with stratification for PDL1 status, T size, nodal status and adjuvant chemo (yes or no) to observation or 1 year of pembrolizumab 200mg IV q 3 weeks. The accrual goal is N=1000 patients with estimated trial duration of 8 years. Two interim analyses are planned for all randomized patients when 50% and 75% of IDFS events have occurred for early stopping for either futility or efficacy. The study was activated on 11/15/16 and 34 patients were registered as of June 9, 2017. Cancer Trials Support Unit (CTSU) sites can use “OPEN” (https://open.ctsu.org) to enroll patients to this trial.

Funding: NIH/NCI U10CA180888, U10CA180819, CA180868; and in part by Merck, Sharpe & Dohme, Corporation.

Citation Format: Pusztai L, Barlow WE, Ganz PA, Henry NL, White J, Jagsi R, Mammen JMV, Lew D, Mejia J, Karantza V, Aktan G, Sharon E, Korde L, Hortobagyi GN, Mamounas E. SWOG S1418/NRG -BR006: A randomized, phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MK-3475 as adjuvant therapy for triple receptor-negative breast cancer with &gt; 1 cm residual invasive cancer or positive lymph nodes (&gt;pN1mic) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-02-04.

Abstract P4-12-10: Evaluation of quality, cost, and value in clinical stage IA breast cancer

Background: There is increasing emphasis in providing high-value care. Value can be interpreted as a ratio of quality of care delivered and the cost to provide that care. We set out to evaluate the value of our care by defining a set of quality metrics (points) for each patient, then evaluating our cost to the payors to the deliver this care.

Methods: Patients with clinical Stage IA breast cancer managed completely at our Cancer Center between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2014 were identified from cancer registry. An IRB-approved retrospective review of clinical charts and financial data was performed. Based on The Advisory Board Company metrics, a set of 18 quality measures was developed. These included process measures (time to initial biopsy, rate of needle biopsy, time to pathology reports, ER/PR and HER2 assessment, pathology synoptic report generation, time to surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy), treatment measures (performance of sentinel node biopsy, administration of chemotherapy for ER- or HER2+ disease, administration of radiation for lumpectomy or pN2/pN3 disease after mastectomy, administration of endocrine therapy for ER+ disease), and complication measures (flap complication after reconstruction, chemotherapy ER visits and inpatient admissions). Depending on the treatment pathway, patients were eligible for a different number of quality points. A patient received a quality point if they were eligible for the measure and met it. Financial review identified actual technical revenue received by the hospital, and apportioned it accordingly to the various revenue centers. Revenue was included for 365 days after the date of first contact, and was used as a proxy for cost to the payors. All patients were included regardless of type of insurance or free-care.

Results: There were 110 patients treated. All patients (100%) underwent surgery (lumpectomy 69%; mastectomy 5%, mastectomy with reconstruction 26%). Chemotherapy was delivered in 20% of patients (neoadjuvant 13%; adjuvant 7%). Radiation therapy was delivered in 57% of patients. Most common treatment pathways were lumpectomy with radiation (46%), mastectomy with reconstruction alone (18%), and lumpectomy alone (14%). Number of potential quality points depended on care pathway, and ranged from 6 to 15 per patient. There were 939 quality points achieved out of possible 1104 (85%) in the entire cohort. Quality ratios per patient varied from 55% to 100%. Lowest quality measure was time-to-surgery &lt;=30 days at 75%. Overall revenue (cost to payors) was $6.2 million for the cohort. Medicare was 35% of patients. Average cost of care per patient was $56.5K (range $0 to $385K). The cost per point of quality was $6,443 (range $0 to $45.4K). Highest cost per quality point was in a commercial insurance patient treated with neoadjuvant TCHP, followed by bilateral mastectomy with DIEP reconstruction and radiation.

Conclusions: We have established a model to assess the value of breast cancer care provided as cost of care delivered per quality point achieved. To improve our value proposition to the payors, and ultimately to our patients, we plan to focus on improving our compliance with the quality measures, monitor care pathway utilization, and identify opportunities to lower the cost of care.

Citation Format: Dvorak T, Rostorfer R, Smith J, Coltey D, Waters J, Mamounas E. Evaluation of quality, cost, and value in clinical stage IA breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-12-10.

Abstract P1-07-02: Chemotherapy (CT) decision in patients (pts) with node-positive (N+), ER+, early breast cancer (EBC) in the wake of new ASCO guideline – A different take on the evidence for the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay

Background: The use of molecular tools for prognosis and prediction of CT benefit in EBC has increased the complexity of decision making. The 21-gene RS (Oncotype DX) is included in the ASCO (2007) and NCCN guidelines (2006) for prognosis (risk of distant recurrence [DR]) and prediction of CT benefit in N0, ER+ EBC. In 2015, the NCCN added that the RS assay could be considered for select patients with 1-3 N+, ER+ EBC. Recently the ASCO BC biomarker/guideline group (J Clin Oncol 2016) advised that the “clinician should not use the 21-gene RS to guide decisions” and called the evidence quality “intermediate” and the recommendation “moderate” based on review of 2 N+ studies. It also advised no change in N+ clinical practice until the prospective SWOG S1007 study (RxPONDER) matures in several years. These discordant recommendations have led to major confusion among physicians, pts and payers. To address this controversy we herein report a comprehensive analysis of the body of evidence regarding the clinical utility of the RS in N+, ER+ EBC.

Methods: All published studies involving N+, ER+ EBC with RS data were analyzed by type of study design and category of trial (validation, supportive, decision impact, cost-effectiveness, and prospective outcomes).

Results: 30 studies provided clinical evidence supporting the value and utility of the RS in N+, ER+ pts. 7 studies employed a prospective-retrospective design or were prospective outcomes with clinical utility in &gt;8000 N+ pts (Table). 23 additional studies assessed the impact of RS on CT decisions or cost-effectiveness.

Study in N+/ER+Type of studyNEndpoints/resultsSWOG S8814 (Lancet Oncol 2010)Pro-retro36710-year DFS and BCSS: RS predicts risk of DFS event, BC death, and CT benefit (none to slightly worse if very low risk RS and 1-3 N+)TransATAC (JCO 2010)Pro-retro3069-year DR: RS predicts risk of DR in pts treated with ET without CTECOG E2197 (JCO 2008)Pro-retro2325-year DR: RS predicts DR risk in CT+ET treated ptsNSABP B-28 (ASCO-BCS 2012)Pro-retro106510-year DRFI: RS predicts DR risk in CT+ET treated ptsPACS-01 (ASCO 2014)Pro-retro5305-year DRFI/DFS: RS predicts DR risk in CT+ET treated ptsSEER (npj BC 2016)Prospective outcomes46915-year BCSM: RS predicts BCSM; pts with RS &lt;18 (Nmi, 1-3 N+) had 1.0% BCSMWSG PlanB (JCO 2016)Prospective outcomes1198 (1088 N1-3/110 N0)3-year DFS: 98.4% in high risk N0/N+ ER+, RS &lt;12 group and 97.5% in RS 12-25 group (5-year DFS 94.0% in both RS groups)BCSM: BC-specific mortality; BCSS: BC-specific survival; DFS: disease free survival; DR: distant recurrence; DRFI: distant recurrence free interval; ET: endocrine therapy; Nmi: micrometastases; pro-retro: prospective-retrospective.

Conclusions: The 21-gene RS has now been studied in &gt;10,000 N+, ER+ EBC pts across 30 studies worldwide, including 2 prospective outcomes studies in &gt;5000 pts, confirming that the RS consistently identifies low risk 1-3 N+ pts in whom CT can effectively and safely be avoided. This evidence suggests that ER+ pts with few N+ and low RS should have a discussion of the pros and cons of adjuvant CT until the results of RxPONDER provide a definitive answer in several years.

Citation Format: Mamounas E, Goldstein L, Penault-Llorca F, Roche H, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Nitz U, O'Shaughnessy J, Albain K. Chemotherapy (CT) decision in patients (pts) with node-positive (N+), ER+, early breast cancer (EBC) in the wake of new ASCO guideline – A different take on the evidence for the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-07-02.

Abstract P5-17-01: A definition of a high-risk early-breast cancer population based on data from the collaborative trials in neoadjuvant breast cancer (CTNeoBC) meta-analysis

Background: Pathological complete response (pCR) is a proposed surrogate endpoint for predicting long-term clinical benefit on endpoints such as event-free survival (EFS) or overall survival (OS). The CTNeoBC meta-analysis did not validate the surrogacy of pCR for EFS or OS, and there is no precedent for its use as a regulatory endpoint in oncology. Use of the accelerated approval pathway has been proposed for neoadjuvant therapies that substantially improve pCR as a means to expedite widespread access to highly effective therapies for high-risk, early breast cancer. Potential risks of this approach include approving an agent that ultimately does not demonstrate clinical benefit and, in the interim, exposing curable patients to the toxicity of therapy without certainty of benefit. To mitigate the risks of this pathway, enrollment to neoadjuvant trials intended to support accelerated approval should be restricted to patients presenting with high-risk early-stage breast cancer. The 5-year EFS rate by breast cancer subtype in the CTNeoBC meta-analysis population is presented. Methods: We identified 12 neoadjuvant randomized trials (N = 12,993) with pCR clearly defined and long-term follow-up available for EFS and OS. Trials included AGO 1 (n = 668), ECTO (n = 1355), EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 (n = 1856), GeparDuo (n = 907), GeparQuattro (n = 1495), GeparTrio (n = 2072), GeparTrio-Pilot (n = 285), NOAH (n = 234), NSABP B18 (n = 760), NSABP B27 (n = 2411), PREPARE (n = 733), and TECHNO (n = 217). The key objective of this analysis was to establish a definition of “high-risk” based on the Kaplan-Meier estimates of the 5-year EFS rate in the different clinical breast cancer subtypes (hormone receptor-positive, HER2-positive and triple-negative) analyzed by tumor stage and tumor grade at presentation. Results: The 5-year EFS rate was less than 65% in all the breast cancer subtypes with stage III disease. For patients with stage II disease, the impact of tumor grade varied by hormone receptor status. Patients with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, regardless of HER2 status had a poor prognosis that was independent of tumor grade. For patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors, regardless of HER2 status, high grade histology was associated with an increased risk of recurrence.

5-year Event-Free Survival Rate (EFS) 5-year EFS Rate Estimate (95% confidence interval)TNMStage IIStage III Grade IIGrade IIIGrade IIGrade IIIHormone Receptor + HER2-83% (80%, 85%)71% (65%, 77%)63% (58%, 69%)51% (42%, 59%)HER2+ HR+81% (75%, 86%)69% (60%, 76%)50% (41%, 59%)48% (37%, 59%)HER2+ HR-61% (51%, 70%)66% (57%, 73%)58% (46%, 69%)46% (36%, 55%)Triple Negative66% (58%, 72%)72% (67%, 76%)38% (27%, 48%)37% (29%, 45%)

Conclusions: This analysis estimated the 5-year EFS rate in the breast cancer subtypes from the CTNeoBC meta-analysis population. The HER2-positive population in the meta-analysis was at particularly high risk because most of the patients had locally advanced breast cancer and only 39% of these patients received trastuzumab therapy. We propose defining less than 75% 5-year EFS rate as “high-risk” for the purposes of designing neoadjuvant trials that intend to use pCR to support accelerated approval.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P5-17-01.

Predictive Factors for Positive Non-Sentinel Nodes Following a Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy: NSABP B-32

Background: Following a positive sentinel node biopsy (SNB), current guidelines recommend an axillary dissection (AD) regardless of SN metastatic tumor size. In the majority of clinically node negative patients the risk for positive non-sentinel axillary nodes (NSN) is low. Predictive factors for positive NSNs following a positive SNB are analyzed in NSABP B-32 with inclusion of SN metastatic tumor size.Materials and Methods: After stratification, women with operable invasive breast cancer and clinically negative nodes were randomized to Sentinel Node Resection (SNR) with immediate conventional Axillary Dissection (AD) [Group 1] or to SNR without AD [Group 2]. Group 2 patients with positive SNs underwent AD. A multivariate analysis of SN positive patients from both groups for whom both a SNR and an AD had been performed was used to assess the need for AD following SNB. Nodes were classified as either SNs or NSNs, defined as all axillary dissection nodes plus any intramammary or other nodes that were not resected as SNs.Results: Between May 1999 and February 2004, 5,611 patients were entered into NSABP Protocol B-32. There were a total of 1,361 SN positive patients with AD from both groups. Data from 1,166 patients were available for multivariate analysis which included SN metastatic tumor size in 735 patients: 424 patients with macrometastaes (&gt;2 mm) and 311 with micrometastases (&lt;2 mm). In 626 patients SN metastatic size was unknown.In patients with positive SNB, results from the final multivariate model based on 653 patients with known covariate values indicated clinical tumor size was a significant predictor for positive NSN (p=0.044, OR: 1.17). Lymphovascular invasion was a significant predictor for positive NSN (p=0.0004, OR: 1.85). SN metastatic tumor size (Macro vs Micro) was a highly significant predictor for positive NSN (p&lt;0.0001, OR: 3.42). Age at study entry, treatment type, proposed type of surgery, HER-2 status, and location of tumor were not significant multivariate predictors for positive NSN. Predictive modeling for positive NSN probability will be presented.Conclusion: Completion AD following a positive SNB, although helpful in prognosis and treatment planning, may not be required in patients with small tumors, absence of lymphovascular invasion, and micrometastases.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 301.

Rethinking the role of nodal status in TNM staging of node-positive breast cancer

10584

Background: Among TNM staging criteria, the number of positive lymph nodes [PNOD] is the strongest predictor of patient outcome. Based on SEER data, Vinh Hung (2004) asserted that the ratio of the number of positive nodes to the number of nodes removed [NODR] may better predict outcome. We evaluated this assertion in patients from 13 node-positive NSABP phase III trials. Methods: The impact of PNOD, its logarithm (LPNOD) and NODR on survival (S) and recurrence free survival (RFS) were assessed via Cox PH models in 19,768 patients with node-positive breast cancer in 13 NSABP clinical trials. The cohort was split into 2 groups: 9 older trials (Protocols B-05, B-07, B-08, B-09, B-10, B-11, B-12, B-15 and B-16) consisting of 9,915 patients and 4 newer trials (B-22, B-25, B-28 and B-31) consisting of 9,853 patients. Only randomized eligible patients with follow-up were considered. Models were fit to the outcomes for the older trials and validated in the newer trials. Results were adjusted for age, protocol and tumor size. We used Wald z-scores, Nagelkerke R2, and residual analyses to assess the strength of the relationship between nodal status and outcomes. Results: Median time on study was 19.8 years in the older trials and 10.6 years in the newer trials. Ten-year models across the protocols revealed that the relative hazard ratio for each of the outcomes studies was logarithmic according to the number of positive nodes for = 30 positive nodes. Using LPNOD and NODR compared to PNOD improved the strength of association but did not greatly improve goodness of fit ( Table 1 1). For all endpoints, the strength of association and goodness of fit associated with nodal status and other TNM factors attenuated in newer protocols. Conclusions: Nodal status and other TNM factors currently used for breast cancer staging continue to be strong indicators of patient prognosis. However, these factors should be augmented to account for new genetic and biological markers.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Role of (18) F-FDG PET scanning in detecting osseous metastases in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a community setting: A retrospective data analysis

17067

Background: Metastasis from a distant site is the most common neoplastic process involving bone. Accurate staging of NSCLC is critical for effective management. Bone scans have been traditionally used for diagnosing bone metastases in NSCLC. Recently, PET scanning has been shown to be effective in detecting bone metastases in several studies. In NSCLC, using a single PET scan to evaluate both the primary tumor and bone metastases might be more cost-effective and if the accuracy of PET scanning for detection of bone metastases can be established, the need for bone scanning may be obviated. We performed a retrospective comparison between PET scan and bone scan in NSCLC patients diagnosed and treated in a community hospital setting. Methods: 50 patients who were diagnosed with NSCLC between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2004 and who had both PET scan and Bone scan done within 3 months of each other were included in the study. 47 patients had both investigations within 40 days duration. Data regarding all the lesions found on bone and PET scan were collected. Results: The median age of the patients was 70.5 years. Total of 20 patients were diagnosed with bone metastases by one or the other test. Of these 15 were identified with bone scan with a sensitivity of 75% (95% Confidence interval CI 56.2%–97.1%). 17 patients were identified by PET scan with a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI 45.5%–92%), p-value -0.48 compared to bone scan. 3 patients who had positive bone scan had a negative PET scan. 5 patients who had positive PET scan had a negative bone scan. Conclusions: PET scan appears to be as good as bone scan in detecting bone metastases. Unless very high clinical suspicion exists regarding bone metastases, negative PET-Scan for bone metastases should obviate the need for bone scan.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18

National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) Protocol B-18 was initiated in 1988 to determine whether four cycles of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide given preoperatively improve survival and disease-free survival (DFS) when compared with the same chemotherapy given postoperatively. Secondary aims included the evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy in downstaging the primary breast tumor and involved axillary lymph nodes, the comparison of lumpectomy rates and rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in the two treatment groups, and the assessment of the correlation between primary tumor response and outcome. Initially published findings were based on a follow-up of 5 years; this report updates results through 9 years of follow-up. There continue to be no statistically significant overall differences in survival or DFS between the two treatment groups. Survival at 9 years is 70% in the postoperative group and 69% in the preoperative group (P =.80). DFS is 53% in postoperative patients and 55% in preoperative patients (P =.50). A statistically significant correlation persists between primary tumor response and outcome, and this correlation has become statistically stronger with longer follow-up. Patients assigned to preoperative chemotherapy received notably more lumpectomies than postoperative patients, especially among patients with tumors greater than 5 cm at study entry. Although the rate of IBTR was slightly higher in the preoperative group (10.7% versus 7.6%), this difference was not statistically significant. Marginally statistically significant treatment-by-age interactions appear to be emerging for survival and DFS, suggesting that younger patients may benefit from preoperative therapy, whereas the reverse may be true for older patients.

Findings from recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project adjuvant studies in stage I breast cancer

Before 1989, credible information about the treatment of breast cancer was derived mainly from randomized clinical trials that enrolled women with either metastatic (stage IV); locally advanced (stage III); or primary, operable, axillary lymph node-positive (stage II) disease. This report provides information from six recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trials involving lymph node-negative (stage I) patients. Findings from NSABP B-13 demonstrated, through 14 years of follow-up, improvements in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival from methotrexate and fluorouracil (MF), regardless of age, in women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumors. Results from NSABP B-19, which was conducted with similar patients, demonstrated, through 8 years, a greater overall DFS and survival advantage with cyclophosphamide and MF (CMF) than that observed with MF. Findings from NSABP B-23, in which patients similar to those in B-13 and B-19 were randomly assigned to receive CMF plus placebo, CMF plus tamoxifen (TAM), doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (AC) plus placebo, or AC plus TAM, demonstrated no difference in relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival among the four groups through 5 years, either for all patients or relative to age. NSABP B-14, which was carried out in women with ER-positive tumors, compared the outcomes of those who received either placebo or TAM. Through 14 years, superior DFS and overall survival advantages, as well as a reduction in contralateral breast cancer, were observed with TAM. No additional benefit resulted from TAM administration beyond 5 years. Findings from NSABP B-20, a second study conducted in patients with ER-positive tumors, showed, after 8 years, both a DFS and an overall survival advantage from TAM plus either MF or CMF over that achieved with TAM alone. A recent meta-analysis in women with negative lymph nodes and either ER-negative or ER-positive tumors of less than or equal to 1 cm in size was conducted using patients from five NSABP trials. After 8 years, the RFS in women with ER-negative tumors was greater in the group treated with surgery and chemotherapy than in those who underwent surgery alone. In women with ER-positive tumors, RFS and overall survival advantages were observed from the addition of chemotherapy to TAM when that treatment regimen was compared with TAM alone. In addition, evidence has been presented from NSABP B-21, a trial evaluating radiation therapy (XRT) and/or TAM for the prevention of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy in women with tumors less than or equal to 1 cm. Findings have shown that XRT is superior to TAM and that XRT + TAM is superior to XRT alone for preventing IBTR. The findings demonstrate that chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy is effective for the management of women with negative axillary lymph nodes and either ER-negative or ER-positive tumors. Because it also has been proven effective in women with tumors less than or equal to 1 cm, such therapy might also be considered in the treatment of that patient population.

Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted two sequential randomized clinical trials to aid in resolving uncertainty about the treatment of women with small, localized, mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). After removal of the tumor and normal breast tissue so that specimen margins were histologically tumor-free (lumpectomy), 818 patients in the B-17 trial were randomly assigned to receive either radiation therapy to the ipsilateral breast or no radiation therapy. B-24, the second study, which involved 1,804 women, tested the hypothesis that, in DCIS patients with or without positive tumor specimen margins, lumpectomy, radiation, and tamoxifen (TAM) would be more effective than lumpectomy, radiation, and placebo in preventing invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs), contralateral breast tumors (CBTs), and tumors at metastatic sites. The findings in this report continue to demonstrate through 12 years of follow-up that radiation after lumpectomy reduces the incidence rate of all IBTRs by 58%. They also demonstrate that the administration of TAM after lumpectomy and radiation therapy results in a significant decrease in the rate of all breast cancer events, particularly in invasive cancer. The findings from the B-17 and B-24 studies are related to those from the NSABP prevention (P-1) trial, which demonstrated a 50% reduction in the risk of invasive cancer in women with a history of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and a reduction in the incidence of both DCIS and LCIS in women without a history of those tumors. The B-17 findings demonstrated that patients treated with lumpectomy alone were at greater risk for invasive cancer than were women in P-1 who had a history of ADH or LCIS and who received no radiation therapy or TAM. Although women who received radiation benefited from that therapy, they remained at higher risk for invasive cancer than women in P-1 who had a history of LCIS and who received placebo or TAM. Thus, if it is accepted from the P-1 findings that women at increased risk for invasive cancer are candidates for an intervention such as TAM, then it would seem that women with a history of DCIS should also be considered for such therapy in addition to radiation therapy. That statement does not imply that, as a result of the findings presented here, all DCIS patients should receive radiation and TAM. It does suggest, however, that, in the treatment of DCIS, the appropriate use of current and better therapeutic agents that become available could diminish the significance of breast cancer as a public health problem.

Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted two sequential randomized clinical trials to aid in resolving uncertainty about the treatment of women with small, localized, mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). After removal of the tumor and normal breast tissue so that specimen margins were histologically tumor-free (lumpectomy), 818 patients in the B-17 trial were randomly assigned to receive either radiation therapy to the ipsilateral breast or no radiation therapy. B-24, the second study, which involved 1,804 women, tested the hypothesis that, in DCIS patients with or without positive tumor specimen margins, lumpectomy, radiation, and tamoxifen (TAM) would be more effective than lumpectomy, radiation, and placebo in preventing invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs), contralateral breast tumors (CBTs), and tumors at metastatic sites. The findings in this report continue to demonstrate through 12 years of follow-up that radiation after lumpectomy reduces the incidence rate of all IBTRs by 58%. They also demonstrate that the administration of TAM after lumpectomy and radiation therapy results in a significant decrease in the rate of all breast cancer events, particularly in invasive cancer. The findings from the B-17 and B-24 studies are related to those from the NSABP prevention (P-1) trial, which demonstrated a 50% reduction in the risk of invasive cancer in women with a history of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and a reduction in the incidence of both DCIS and LCIS in women without a history of those tumors. The B-17 findings demonstrated that patients treated with lumpectomy alone were at greater risk for invasive cancer than were women in P-1 who had a history of ADH or LCIS and who received no radiation therapy or TAM. Although women who received radiation benefited from that therapy, they remained at higher risk for invasive cancer than women in P-1 who had a history of LCIS and who received placebo or TAM. Thus, if it is accepted from the P-1 findings that women at increased risk for invasive cancer are candidates for an intervention such as TAM, then it would seem that women with a history of DCIS should also be considered for such therapy in addition to radiation therapy. That statement does not imply that, as a result of the findings presented here, all DCIS patients should receive radiation and TAM. It does suggest, however, that, in the treatment of DCIS, the appropriate use of current and better therapeutic agents that become available could diminish the significance of breast cancer as a public health problem.

Randomized trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy for carcinoma of the rectum: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-02

BACKGROUND

The conviction that postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy represent an acceptable standard of care for patients with Dukes' B (stage II) and Dukes' C (stage III) carcinoma of the rectum evolved in the absence of data from clinical trials designed to determine whether the addition of radiotherapy results in improved disease-free survival and overall survival. This study was carried out to address this issue. An additional aim was to determine whether leucovorin (LV)-modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is superior to the combination of 5-FU, semustine, and vincristine (MOF) in men.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients (n = 694) with Dukes' B or C carcinoma of the rectum were enrolled in National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) Protocol R-02 from September 1987 through December 1992 and were followed. They were randomly assigned to receive either postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy alone (n = 348) or chemotherapy with postoperative radiotherapy (n = 346). All female patients (n = 287) received 5-FU plus LV chemotherapy; male patients received either MOF (n = 207) or 5-FU plus LV (n = 200). Primary analyses were carried out by use of a stratified log-rank statistic; P values are two-sided.

RESULTS

The average time on study for surviving patients is 93 months as of September 30, 1998. Postoperative radiotherapy resulted in no beneficial effect on disease-free survival (P =.90) or overall survival (P =.89), regardless of which chemotherapy was utilized, although it reduced the cumulative incidence of locoregional relapse from 13% to 8% at 5-year follow-up (P =.02). Male patients who received 5-FU plus LV demonstrated a statistically significant benefit in disease-free survival at 5 years compared with those who received MOF (55% versus 47%; P =.009) but not in 5-year overall survival (65% versus 62%; P =.17).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of postoperative radiation therapy to chemotherapy in Dukes' B and C rectal cancer did not alter the subsequent incidence of distant disease, although there was a reduction in locoregional relapse when compared with chemotherapy alone.

Clinical trial to assess the relative efficacy of fluorouracil and leucovorin, fluorouracil and levamisole, and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole in patients with Dukes' B and C carcinoma of the colon: results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project C-04

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of leucovorin-modulated fluorouracil (FU+LV) with that of fluorouracil and levamisole (FU+LEV) or with the combination of FU+LV and levamisole (FU+LV+LEV).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 1989 and December 1990, 2,151 patients with Dukes' B (stage II) and Dukes' C (stage III) carcinoma of the colon were entered onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowl Project protocol C-04. Patients were randomly assigned to receive FU+LV (weekly regimen), FU + LEV, or the combination of FU+LV+LEV. The average time on study was 86 months.

RESULTS

A pairwise comparison between patients treated with FU+LV or FU+LEV disclosed a prolongation in disease-free survival (DFS) in favor of the FU+LV group (65% v 60%; P =.04); there was a small prolongation in overall survival that was of borderline significance (74% v 70%; P =.07). There was no difference in the pairwise comparison between patients who received FU+LV or FU+LV+LEV for either DFS (65% v 64%; P =.67) or overall survival (74% v 73%; P =.99). There was no interaction between Dukes' stage and the effect of treatment.

CONCLUSION

In patients with Dukes' B and C carcinoma of the colon, treatment with FU+LV seems to confer a small DFS advantage and a borderline prolongation in overall survival when compared with treatment with FU+LEV. The addition of LEV to FU+LV does not provide any additional benefit over and above that achieved with FU+LV. These findings support the use of adjuvant FU+LV as an acceptable therapeutic standard in patients with Dukes' B and C carcinoma of the colon.

Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We have shown previously that lumpectomy with radiation therapy was more effective than lumpectomy alone for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We did a double-blind randomised controlled trial to find out whether lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen was of more benefit than lumpectomy and radiation therapy alone for DCIS.

METHODS

1804 women with DCIS, including those whose resected sample margins were involved with tumour, were randomly assigned lumpectomy, radiation therapy (50 Gy), and placebo (n=902), or lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen (20 mg daily for 5 years, n=902). Median follow-up was 74 months (range 57-93). We compared annual event rates and cumulative probability of invasive or non-invasive ipsilateral and contralateral tumours over 5 years.

FINDINGS

Women in the tamoxifen group had fewer breast-cancer events at 5 years than did those on placebo (8.2 vs 13.4%, p=0.0009). The cumulative incidence of all invasive breast-cancer events in the tamoxifen group was 4.1% at 5 years: 2.1% in the ipsilateral breast, 1.8% in the contralateral breast, and 0.2% at regional or distant sites. The risk of ipsilateral-breast cancer was lower in the tamoxifen group even when sample margins contained tumour and when DCIS was associated with comedonecrosis.

INTERPRETATION

The combination of lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen was effective in the prevention of invasive cancer.

Comparative efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with Dukes' B versus Dukes' C colon cancer: results from four National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project adjuvant studies (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04)

PURPOSE

Although the benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly established in patients with Dukes' C colon cancer, such benefit has been questioned in patients with Dukes' B disease. To determine whether patients with Dukes' B disease benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and to evaluate the magnitude of the benefit, compared with that observed in Dukes' C patients, we examined the relative efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy according to Dukes' stage in four sequential National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04) that compared different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens with each other or with no adjuvant treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The four trials included Dukes' B and C patients and were conducted between 1977 and 1990. The eligibility criteria and follow-up requirements were similar for all four trials. Protocol C-01 compared adjuvant semustine, vincristine, and fluorouracil (5-FU) (MOF regimen) with operation alone. Protocol C-02 compared the perioperative administration of a portal venous infusion of 5-FU with operation alone. Protocol C-03 compared adjuvant 5-FU and leucovorin (LV) with adjuvant MOF. Protocol C-04 compared adjuvant 5-FU and LV with 5-FU and levamisole (LEV) and with the combination of 5-FU, LV, and LEV.

RESULTS

Forty-one percent of the patients included in these four trials had resected Dukes' B tumors. In all four studies, the overall, disease-free, and recurrence-free survival improvement noted for all patients was evident in both Dukes' B and Dukes' C patients. When the relative efficacy of chemotherapy was examined, there was always an observed reduction in mortality, recurrence, or disease-free survival event, irrespective of Dukes' stage, and in most instances, the reduction was as great or greater for Dukes' B patients as for Dukes' C patients. When data from all four trials were examined in a combined analysis, the mortality reduction was 30% for Dukes' B patients versus 18% for Dukes' C patients. The mortality reduction in Dukes' B patients occurred irrespective of the presence or absence of adverse prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

Patients with Dukes' B colon cancer benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and should be presented with this treatment option. Regardless of the presence or absence of other clinical prognostic factors, Dukes' B patients seem to benefit from chemotherapy administration.

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer

PURPOSE

To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.

Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17

PURPOSE

In 1993, findings from a National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial to evaluate the worth of radiation therapy after lumpectomy concluded that the combination was more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for localized intraductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS). This report extends those findings.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women (N = 818) with localized DCIS were randomly assigned to lumpectomy or lumpectomy plus radiation (50 Gy). Tissue was removed so that resected specimen margins were histologically tumor-free. Mean follow-up time was 90 months (range, 67 to 130). Size and method of tumor detection were determined by central clinical, mammographic, and pathologic assessment. Life-table estimates of event-free survival and survival, average annual rates of occurrence for specific events, relative risks for event-specific end points, and cumulative probability of specific events comprising event-free survival are presented.

RESULTS

The benefit of lumpectomy plus radiation was virtually unchanged between 5 and 8 years of follow-up and was due to a reduction in invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumors (IBTs). Incidence of locoregional and distant events remained similar in both treatment groups; deaths were only infrequently related to breast cancer. Incidence of noninvasive IBT was reduced from 13.4% to 8.2% (P = .007), and of invasive IBT, from 13.4% to 3.9% (P < .0001). All cohorts benefited from radiation regardless of clinical or mammographic tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Through 8 years of follow-up, our findings continue to indicate that lumpectomy plus radiation is more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for women with localized, mammographically detected DCIS. When evaluated according to the mammographic characteristics of their DCIS, all groups benefited from radiation.

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18

PURPOSE

To determine whether preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) permits more lumpectomies to be performed and decreases the incidence of positive nodes in women with primary breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women (n = 1,523) were randomized to National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18; 759 eligible patients received postoperative AC and 747, preoperative AC. The clinical size of breast and axillary tumors was determined before each of four cycles of AC and before surgery. Tumor response to preoperative therapy was clinically complete (cCR), partial (cPR), stable (cSD), or progressive disease (cPD). Tissue from patients with a cCR was evaluated for a pathologic complete response (pCR).

RESULTS

Breast tumor size was reduced in 80% of patients after preoperative therapy; 36% had a cCR. Tumor size and clinical nodal status were independent predictors of cCR. Twenty-six percent of women with a cCR had a pCR. Clinical nodal response occurred in 89% of node-positive patients: 73% had a cCR and 44% of those had a pCR. There was a 37% increase in the incidence of pathologically negative nodes. Before randomization, lumpectomy was proposed for 86% of women with tumors < or = 2 cm, 70% with tumors 2.1 to 5.0 cm, and 3% with tumors > or = 5.1 cm. Clinical tumor size and nodal status influenced the physician's decision. Overall, 12% more lumpectomies were performed in the preoperative group; in women with tumors > or = 5.1 cm, there was a 175% increase.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative therapy reduced the size of most breast tumors and decreased the incidence of positive nodes. The greatest increase in lumpectomy after preoperative therapy occurred in women with tumors > or = 5 cm, since women with tumors less than 5 cm were already lumpectomy candidates. Preoperative therapy should be considered for the initial management of breast tumors judged too large for lumpectomy.

Increased intensification and total dose of cyclophosphamide in a doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen for the treatment of primary breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-22

PURPOSE

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) initiated a randomized trial (B-22) to determine if intensifying but maintaining the total dose of cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Bristol-Myers Squibb Oncology, Princeton, NJ) in a doxorubicin (Adriamycin, Pharmacia, Kalamazoo, MI)-cyclophosphamide combination (AC), or if intensifying and increasing the total dose of cyclophosphamide improves the outcome of women with primary breast cancer and positive axillary nodes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients (N = 2,305) were randomized to receive either four courses of standard AC therapy (group 1); intensified therapy, in which the same total dose of cyclophosphamide was administered in two courses (group 2); or intensified and increased therapy, in which the total dose of cyclophosphamide was doubled (group 3). The dose and intensity of doxorubicin were similar in all groups. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were determined using life-table estimates.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in DFS (P = .30) or overall survival (P = .95) among the groups through 5 years. At 5 years, the DFS of women in group 1 was similar to that of women in group 2 (62% v 60%, respectively; P = .43) and to that of women in group 3 (62% v 64%, respectively; P = .59). The 5-year survival of women in group 1 was similar to that of women in group 2 (78% v 77%, respectively; P = .86) and to that of women in group 3 (78% v 77%, respectively; P = .82). Grade 4 toxicity increased in groups 2 and 3. Failure to note a difference in outcome among the groups was unrelated to either differences in amount and intensity of cyclophosphamide or to dose delays and intervals between courses of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Intensifying or intensifying and increasing the total dose of cyclophosphamide failed to significantly improve either DFS or overall survival in any group. It was concluded that, outside of a clinical trial, dose-intensification of cyclophosphamide in an AC combination represents inappropriate therapy for women with primary breast cancer.

Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) Protocol B-17. Intraductal carcinoma (ductal carcinoma in situ). The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Collaborating Investigators

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists concerning the natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast, including its pathologic expression and treatment. This controversy has been fostered largely by the retrospective nature and limited sample sizes of extant studies.

METHOD

Resolution of some of these issues was attempted by analyzing the pathologic features of 573 examples of DCIS obtained from a larger cohort of 790 women with DCIS enrolled in Protocol B-17 of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project. This prospective randomized clinical trial was performed to assess the efficacy of local breast irradiation to reduce the incidence of second ipsilateral breast tumors (IBT) after lumpectomy.

RESULTS

Tumor and patient characteristics, including significantly less IBT for those treated by lumpectomy and irradiation than lumpectomy alone, were almost identical for the subset comprising this analysis and the total B-17 cohort reported previously. The presence of moderate/marked comedo necrosis, which was evaluated as an independent parameter rather than as a specific histologic type of DCIS and uncertain/involved lumpectomy margins were the only statistically significant independent predictors of IBT for patients treated by lumpectomy as well as irradiation. The latter markedly reduced the annual hazard rates for the IBT associated with these indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not an endpoint of this study, the authors' findings suggest that the beneficial effect of irradiation in reducing IBT after lumpectomy for DCIS occurs with small (< 1.0 cm.) and larger lesions. Moderate/marked comedo necrosis and uncertain/involved lumpectomy margins represent independent predictors of IBT.

Primary colorectal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

BACKGROUND

The gastrointestinal tract is the most common site of extranodal involvement in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Primary colorectal NHL comprises 13-18% of all gastrointestinal NHL but is not commonly reported as a separate entity.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of the medical records of 19 patients over a 16-year period to evaluate the clinical features and behavior of colorectal NHL.

RESULTS

A pediatric group of seven male patients presented at an early stage with acute symptomatology. The primary tumor was located in the ileocecum in all cases and intussusception was common. An adult group of 12 patients presented at a later stage with chronic symptomatology. Staging study results were positive by bone marrow biopsy in four of 16 patients (25%), by lymph-angiography in six of 11 patients (54.5%), and by gallium scan in eight of 10 patients (80%). Seven patients relapsed a median of 8 months after treatment. Three other patients died during treatment, one died of other causes, and one died without receiving treatment. The remaining seven patients are alive from 41 to 231 months without evidence of disease. Five of these patients are in the pediatric group, where the median survival was > 72 months. The overall median survival was 45 months.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal NHL is a disease that affects both the pediatric and adult population. Although pediatric patients have an excellent prognosis with anticipated long-term survival after treatment, long-term survival can be expected in approximately 50% of adult patients. In both groups of patients, multimodality therapy with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation is the treatment of choice.