Prognostic value of Bcl‐2 in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant anthracycline based chemotherapy

We have analyzed the predictive/prognostic value of Bcl‐2 protein in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. One hundred and ten patients were submitted to two different chemotherapeutic regimens: a) 5‐fluorouracil, adriamycin or epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC/FEC) during 2–6 cycles before surgery and 3 or 4 additional cycles of FAC/FEC after surgery (n=40) and b) doxorubicin (D) 75mg/m2 or epirubicin (E) 120mg/m2 during 4 cycles before surgery, and 6 cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5‐fluorouracil (CMF) after surgery (n=70). Bcl‐2 expression, evaluated by immunohistochemistry, did not change significantly after chemotherapy and was not related to clinical/pathological response. In FAC/FEC group, Bcl‐2 positive expression after chemotherapy correlated with better disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) (P=0.008 and P=0.001). In D/E group, Bcl‐2 also correlated with better DFS and OS (P=0.03 and P=0.054) in the post‐chemotherapy biopsies. An unusual nuclear localization of Bax was observed in some biopsies, but this localization did not correlate with the tumor response or outcome of the patients. We found that a high Bcl‐2 expression had no predictive value but had prognostic value in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant anthracycline based chemotherapy.     

Subclinical cardiotoxicity following adjuvant dose-escalated FEC, high-dose chemotherapy, or CMF in breast cancer

We compared adjuvant chemotherapy-related myocardial damage by antimyosin scintigraphy in patients who received either nine cycles of FEC (fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide) where the doses of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide were escalated according to the leucocyte nadir (group I, n = 14), three cycles of FEC followed by high-dose chemotherapy with alkylating agents (CTCb) given with the support of peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (group II, n = 14), or six cycles of standard intravenous CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil; group III, n = 8). The cardiac uptake of In-111-antimyosin-Fab (R11D10) antibody was measured and the heart-to-lung ratio (HLR) calculated 8-36 months after the last dose of chemotherapy. Cardiac antimyosin antibody uptake was considerably higher among patients treated with nine cycles of dose-escalated FEC than among those who were treated with three cycles of FEC and high-dose CTCb (HLR, median 1.98; range 1.36-2.24 vs median 1.51; range 1.20-1.82; P < 0.001), or those treated with CMF (median 1.44; range 1.15-1.68; P < 0.001). The difference between groups II and III was not significant (P > 0.1). A linear association was found between the cumulative dose of epirubicin and the cardiac antimyosin uptake (P < 0.001). We conclude that subclinical cardiac damage caused by three cycles of conventional-dose FEC followed by one cycle of high-dose CTCb chemotherapy is small as compared with the damage caused by dose-escalated FEC.     

Improved outcome from substituting methotrexate with epirubicin: results from a randomised comparison of CMF versus CEF in patients with primary breast cancer

We compared the efficacy of CEF (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil) against CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil) in moderate or high risk breast cancer patients. We randomly assigned 1224 patients with completely resected unilateral breast cancer to receive nine cycles of three-weekly intravenous CMF or CEF. Patients were encouraged to take part in a parallel trial comparing oral pamidronate 150 mg twice daily for 4 years versus control (data not shown). Substitution of methotrexate with epirubicin significantly reduced the unadjusted hazard for disease-free survival (DFS) by 16% (hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI; 0.71-0.99) and for overall survival by 21% (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% CI; 0.66-0.94). The risk of secondary leukaemia and congestive heart failure was similar in the two groups. Overall CEF was superior over CMF in terms of DFS and OS in patients with operable breast cancer without subsequent increase in late toxicities.     

Inflammatory breast cancer outcome with epirubicin-based induction and maintenance chemotherapy: ten-year results from the French Adjuvant Study Group GETIS 02 Trial

BACKGROUND: The authors evaluated the long-term efficacy and side effects in patients with nonmetastatic, unilateral, inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) who received homogeneous treatment with intensive induction chemotherapy followed by a maintenance regimen. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients were randomized to receive high-dose fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC-HD) (fluorouracil 750 mg/m(2) on Days 1 to 4, epirubicin 35 mg/m(2) on Days 2 to 4, and cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m(2) on Days 2 to 4 for 4 cycles every 21 days) with or without lenograstim. Locoregional treatment consisted of surgery and/or radiotherapy. Maintenance chemotherapy was FEC 75 (fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 75 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) on Day 1 every 21 days for 4 cycles). No hormone treatment was allowed. RESULTS: The safety of the FEC-HD regimen was described previously. Among 102 patients who underwent surgery, a pathologic complete response (pCR) was achieved by 23.5% of patients with breast tumors and by 31.4% of patients with involved axillary lymph nodes. The overall pCR rate was 14.7%. One hundred nine patients received FEC 75. After a median 10 years of follow-up, the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 35.7% and 41.2%, respectively. The median DFS was 39 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 25-53 months), and the median survival was 61 months (95% CI, 43-79 months). Five patients developed a temporary decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction without congestive heart failure. In the lenograstim group, 1 patient developed acute myeloblastic leukemia M2, and 1 patient developed myelodysplastic syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: FEC-HD induction chemotherapy followed by FEC 75 maintenance regimen had moderate and acute long-term toxicities and lead to high DFS and OS rates in patients with IBC.     

Epirubicin increases long-term survival in adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with poor-prognosis, node-positive, early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial.

PURPOSE: The French Adjuvant Study Group 05 (FASG-05) showed that fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2, and epirubicin 100 mg/m2 (FEC 100) was superior to the same regimen with epirubicin 50 mg/m2 (FEC 50) in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. We report 10-year data on efficacy, and long-term side effects for FASG-05. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 565 patients to treatment with FEC 50 or FEC 100 after surgery. Postmenopausal patients also received tamoxifen for 3 years, and almost all patients (96%) also received radiotherapy. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 110 months. The 10-year DFS was 45.3% (95% CI, 41.9% to 48.7%) with FEC 50 and 50.7% (95% CI, 47.3% to 54.1%) with FEC 100 (Wilcoxon P = .036; log-rank P = .08). The 10-year OS was 50.0% (95% CI, 46.7% to 53.3%) with FEC 50 and 54.8% (95% CI, 51.3% to 58.3%) with FEC 100 (Wilcoxon P = .038; log-rank P = .05). Delayed cardiac toxicity (before relapse) occurred in four patients (1.5%) in the FEC 50 arm and three patients (1.1%) in the FEC 100 arm. Cardiac toxicity after relapse occurred in six (4.3%) and five (4.1%) patients treated with FEC 50 and FEC 100, respectively. CONCLUSION: Treatment with adjuvant FEC 100 demonstrated superior DFS and OS versus FEC 50 at 10 years of follow-up. This survival advantage was not offset by long-term complications such as cardiac toxicity and second malignancy. Given the risk-benefit ratio, FEC 100 is a more optimal regimen for long-term survival in patients with poor prognosis.     

Improved disease-free survival with epirubicin-based chemoendocrine adjuvant therapy compared with tamoxifen alone in one to three node-positive, estrogen-receptor-positive, postmenopausal breast cancer patients: results of French Adjuvant Study Group 02 and 07 trials.

BACKGROUND: The purpose was to compare disease-free survival (DFS) between epirubicin-based chemoendocrine therapy and tamoxifen alone in one to three node-positive (N1-3), estrogen-receptor-positive (ER+), postmenopausal early breast cancer (EBC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed, retrospectively, 457 patients randomized in FASG 02 and 07 trials who received: tamoxifen alone (30 mg/day, 3 years); or FEC50 (fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 50 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2, six cycles every 21 days) plus tamoxifen started concurrently. Radiotherapy was delivered after the third cycle in FASG 02 trial, and after the sixth in FASG 07 trial. RESULTS: The 9-year DFS rates were 72% with tamoxifen and 84% with FEC50-tamoxifen (P = 0.008). The multivariate analysis showed that pathological tumor size >2 cm was an independent prognostic factor (P = 0.002), and treatment effects remained significantly in favor of chemoendocrine therapy (P = 0.0008). The 9-year overall survival rates were 78% and 86%, respectively (P = 0.11). In the multivariate model, there was a trend in favor of chemoendocrine therapy (P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: The addition of FEC50 adjuvant chemotherapy to tamoxifen significantly improves long-term DFS in N1-3, ER+ and postmenopausal women. Chemoendocrine therapy seems to be more effective than tamoxifen in terms of long-term survival.     

Phase III trial comparing two dose levels of epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare a full-dose epirubicin-cyclophosphamide (HEC) regimen with classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) therapy and with a moderate-dose epirubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen (EC) in the adjuvant therapy of node-positive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Node-positive breast cancer patients who were aged 70 years or younger were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: CMF for six cycles (oral cyclophosphamide); EC for eight cycles (epirubicin 60 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2); day 1 every 3 weeks); and HEC for eight cycles (epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 830 mg/m(2); day 1 every 3 weeks). RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five, 267, and 255 eligible patients were treated with CMF, EC, and HEC, respectively. Patient characteristics were well balanced among the three arms. One and three cases of congestive heart failure were reported in the EC and HEC arms, respectively. Three cases of acute myeloid leukemia were reported in the HEC arm. After 4 years of median follow-up, no statistically significant differences were observed between HEC and CMF (event-free survival [EFS]: hazards ratio [HR] = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.31, P =.80; distant-EFS: HR = 0.97, 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.34, P =.87; overall survival [OS]: HR = 0.97, 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.44, P =.87). HEC is more effective than EC (EFS: HR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.99, P =.04; distant-EFS: HR = 0.75, 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02, P =.06; OS HR = 0.69, 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.00, P =.05). CONCLUSION: This three-arm study does not show an advantage in favor of an adequately dosed epirubicin-based regimen over classical CMF in the adjuvant therapy of node-positive pre- and postmenopausal women with breast cancer. Moreover, this study confirms that there is a dose-response curve for epirubicin in breast cancer adjuvant therapy.     

PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative,dose-dense,dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin,paclitaxel, and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin–cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with or without darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer—outcome on prognosis

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare the effect of dose-intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with that of standard epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel in combination with or without darbepoetin on survival in primary breast cancer.Patients and methodsA total of 733 patients received either four cycles of neoadjuvant epirubicin 90 mg/m² plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m² every 3 weeks followed by four cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m² every 3 weeks (EC→T), or three cycles of epirubicin 150 mg/m² every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of paclitaxel 225 mg/m² every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (E_dd→T_dd→CMF). The patients were randomly assigned to receive darbepoetin or none. The primary objective was to demonstrate a superior disease-free survival (DFS) of E_dd→T_dd→CMF compared with EC→T.ResultsEstimated 3-year DFS was 75.8% with EC→T versus 78.8% with E_dd→T_dd→CMF [hazard ratio (HR) 1.14; P = 0.37] and overall survival (OS) 88.4% versus 91.5% (HR 1.26; P = 0.237). Three-year DFS was 74.3% with darbepoetin versus 80.0% without (HR 1.31; P = 0.061) and OS 88.0% versus 91.8% (HR 1.33; P = 0.139). Patients with a pathologically documented complete response [pathological complete response (pCR)] had a significantly better DFS compared with those without achieving a pCR (estimated 3-year DFS: 89.2% versus 74.9%; HR 2.27; P = 0.001).ConclusionNeoadjuvant dose-intensified chemotherapy compared with standard chemotherapy did not improve DFS, whereas the addition of darbepoetin might have detrimental effects on DFS.     

Randomised trial: survival benefit and safety of adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer

We evaluated the survival benefit, safety, feasibility, and tolerability of dose-dense (DD) adjuvant chemotherapy with epirubicin and paclitaxel for women with node-positive primary breast cancer. Randomised patients (n=216) received DD or conventional-schedule (CS) chemotherapy. Dose-dense regimen patients (n=108) received epirubicin 90 mg m-2 plus paclitaxel 175 mg m-2 in four 14-day cycles, then cyclophosphamide 600 mg m-2, methotrexate 40 mg m-2, and fluorouracil 600 mg m-2 (CMF 600/40/600) in three 14-day cycles, plus filgrastim 5 microg kg day-1 as growth support in every cycle. Conventional-schedule regimen patients (n=108) received epirubicin 90 mg m-2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg m-2 in four 21-day cycles, then CMF 600/40/600 in three 21-day cycles, plus filgrastim if required. After a median follow-up of 38.4 months, 71 patients (33%) relapsed or died: DD, 33 patients (15 deaths); CS, 38 patients (22 deaths). Dose dense showed a trend for improved disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Four-year rates of DFS and OS were 64 and 85% for DD, and 58 and 75% for CS. All seven cycles were administered to 208 patients (96%). Rates of cycle delay, discontinuation, dose reduction, and adverse events were similar in both groups. Dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin/paclitaxel then CMF, supported by filgrastim, is safe and improves survival for patients with node-positive breast cancer.     

Phase II study of preoperative sequential FEC and docetaxel predicts of pathological response and disease free survival

Purpose This multicenter phase II study examined the impact of pathological effect on survival after preoperative chemotherapy in Japanese women with early stage breast cancer. Patients and methods Prior to surgery, patients received four cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) q3w) followed by four cycles of docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) q3w). Primary endpoint was 3 year disease free survival (DFS) stratified by the absence or presence of Quasi-pCR (QpCR; absence of invasive tumor or only focal residual tumor cells). Secondary endpoints were predictors for QpCR, clinical response, breast conservation rate, and safety. Results Between June 2002 and June 2004, 202 women were enrolled. Among 191 assessable patients, 25% achieved QpCR. With 40 months median follow-up, 3 year DFS was estimated at 91% for all patients. 3 year DFS for patients with QpCR was 98% vs. 89% without QpCR (hazard ratio 0.38 [95% Confidence Interval 0.09-0.84], P = 0.0134). HER2 status and response to FEC were independent predictors of QpCR. The overall clinical response was 75%; 85% of patients achieved breast conservation. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was the most common adverse event, observed in 44% and 35% of patients during FEC and docetaxel, respectively. Treatment related side effects were manageable; there were no treatment related fatalities. Conclusion FEC followed by docetaxel is an active and manageable preoperative regimen for women with early stage breast cancer. QpCR following preoperative chemotherapy predicts favorable DFS. HER2 overexpression and clinical response to FEC predict QpCR.     

Combination or mild single agent chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer? CMF vs epirubicin measuring quality of life.

Forty patients with advanced breast cancer, randomised to receive CMF or weekly low dose Epirubicin, were evaluated by UICC criteria of response and WHO toxicity criteria, in addition to three QoL instruments: the ''Qualitator'' daily diary card, 4 weekly Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and Linear Analogue Self-Assessment (LASA). Response rates were 58% for CMF and 29% for epirubicin (chi 2 = 3.51, 1 d.f., P > 0.05). Median time to treatment failure was 24 weeks for CMF, 7 weeks for epirubicin (P < 0.05) but survival was similar in both groups. Survival was better for responders than for non-responders (medians 87 and 30 weeks, P = 0.02). CMF caused more objective alopecia (P < 0.001), nausea and vomiting (P < 0.001) and haematological toxicity (P < 0.02). However, QoL measures only recorded a significant difference in energy and pain, influenced primarily by the non-responders in each treatment group but with no difference in overall global scores. Scores for responders, irrespective of treatment, were better to start with (LASA P = 0.001); at 12 weeks, scores had improved (Qualitator P < 0.05; NHP P < 0.05). Scores in non-responders showed no change. In this small study aggressive chemotherapy gave better response and similar survival without impairing Quality of life overall. Detailed QoL measurement should be integral to all cancer chemotherapy trials.     

Dose-intensive epirubicin-based chemotherapy is superior to an intensive intravenous cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil regimen in metastatic breast cancer: a randomized multinational study.

PURPOSE: To determine the relative efficacy of a cyclophosphamide epirubicin and fluorouracil (CEF) regimen compared with an intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) combination in metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either CEF (cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m(2) IV, epirubicin 50 mg/m(2) IV, and fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8), or CMF (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) IV, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) IV, and fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2) IV on days 1 and 8). Treatment was given in 3- to 4-week cycles for a total of six to nine cycles. RESULTS: A total of 460 patients (223 CEF and 237 CMF) were randomized. Overall response rate was superior for CEF than CMF in all randomized patients (57% v 46%, respectively; P =.01) and in the assessable subset (66% v 52%, respectively; P =.005). With a median follow-up of more than 20 months, time to progression (TTP) was significantly longer with CEF than CMF (median 8.9 v 6.3 months, respectively; P =.0064), as was time to treatment failure (TTF) (median 6.2 v 5.0 months, respectively; P =.01). Significant survival differences were not observed between CEF and CMF (median 20.1 v 18.2 months, respectively; P =.23). Granulocytopenia and infections were similar in both arms. Grade 3/4 nausea/vomiting and alopecia were more frequent with CEF, whereas diarrhea was more frequent with CMF. Cardiac toxicity, primarily asymptomatic, required withdrawal from study of 15 patients on CEF (7%) and one patient on CMF. CONCLUSION: This CEF regimen safely provides significantly better tumor control than CMF, manifest as a higher response rate, and longer TTP and TTF, but not survival, when used as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.     

Complete hormonal blockade versus epirubicin-based chemotherapy in premenopausal, one to three node-positive, and hormone-receptor positive, early breast cancer patients: 7-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 06 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine optimal adjuvant therapy between complete hormonal blockade in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor positive breast cancer and one to three positive nodes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomised 333 patients to receive either LHRH agonist (triptorelin 3.75 mg i.m., monthly) plus tamoxifen 30 mg/day for 3 years (TAM-LHRHa, n=164), or fluorouracil 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 every 21 days for six cycles, without any hormonal treatment (FEC50, n=169). RESULTS: The 7-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 76% with TAM-LHRHa, and 72% with FEC50 (P=0.13). The 7-year overall survival (OS) was 91% and 88%, respectively (P=0.20). The multivariate analysis confirmed that both treatments were not different for DFS and OS (P=0.83 and P=0.41, respectively). Amenorrhoea occurred in 64% of patients treated with FEC50; it was temporary in 58% of cases after hormonotherapy and in 31% after chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: In intermediate-risk breast cancer, complete hormonal blockade and chemotherapy provided similar outcomes. Hormonal treatment is an alternative to chemotherapy in hormone-sensitive patients, considering the preference of patients in terms of quality of life.     

Postoperative dose-dense sequential versus concomitant administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel in patients with node-positive breast cancer: 5-year results of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group HE 10/00 phase III Trial

To explore the impact of dose intensity (DI) in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer, a randomized phase III trial was conducted comparing postoperative dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF)in high-risk breast cancer patients. From Oct 2000 to June 2005, 1,121 node-positive patients were randomized to dose-dense sequential epirubicin 110 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel (Taxol, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Princeton, NJ) 250 mg/m(2) (group A), or concurrent epirubicin 83 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel 187 mg/m(2) (group B), both followed by three cycles of "intensified" combination chemotherapy with CMF. By protocol design total cumulative dose and duration of treatment were identical in both groups. Dose intensity of epirubicin and paclitaxel was double in the dose-dense arm. Prophylactic treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given with the dose-dense treatments. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary endpoint. At a median follow-up of 76 months, 253 patients (23%) had documented disease relapse (123 vs. 130 in groups A and B, respectively) and 208 deaths (101, group A and 107, group B) had been observed. The 5-year DFS rate of 74 and 74% and OS rate of 86 and 85% were observed for group A and group B, respectively. No differences were found in DFS or OS between the two treatment groups (P = 0.78 and P = 0.45 for DFS and OS, respectively). Safety analysis results showing that both regimens were well tolerated and safe have been previously published (Fountzilas et al. Ann Oncol 2008). No DFS or OS benefit from the dose-dense sequential epirubicin and paclitaxel was detected when compared to the concurrent administration of the same drugs. No additional safety issues were raised with long-term follow-up.     

Adjuvant fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide in early breast cancer: is it cost-effective?

Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in breast cancer exposes patients to morbidity, but improves survival. The FEC (fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide) regimen has taken over the prior role of CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil). In this model, efficacy, tolerability and quality of life (QoL) data from the literature were incorporated with Norwegian practice and cost data in a cost-effectiveness approach. The FEC efficacy was calculated 3-7% superior CMF. There was no difference in quality of life. An 80-100% dose intensity range was employed, one Euro (€ 1) was calculated NOK 8.78 and a 3% discount rate was used. The total cost of FEC employing the friction cost method on production loss, including amount spent on drugs, administration and travelling ranged between € 3 278-3 850 (human capital approach € 12 143-12 715). Money spent on drugs alone constituted 15-48%, depending on method chosen. A cost-effectiveness analysis revealed a cost per life year (LY) saved replacing FEC by CMF of € 3 575-15 125. Adjuvant FEC is cost effective in Norway.     

Randomized, controlled trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil with and without tamoxifen for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer: treatment results of Intergroup Protocol INT-0102.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) in node-negative breast cancer patients with and without tamoxifen (TAM), overall and by hormone receptor (HR) status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Node-negative patients identified by tumor size (> 2 cm), negative HR, or high S-phase fraction (n = 2,690) were randomly assigned to CMF, CAF, CMF + TAM (CMFT), or CAF + TAM (CAFT). Cox regression evaluated overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for CAF versus CMF and TAM versus no TAM separately. Two-sided CIs and one-sided P values for planned comparisons were calculated. RESULTS: Ten-year estimates indicated that CAF was not significantly better than CMF (P = .13) for the primary outcome of DFS (77% v 75%; HR = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.27). CAF had slightly better OS than CMF (85% v 82%, HR = 1.19 for CMF v CAF; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.43); values were statistically significant in the planned one-sided test (P = .03). Toxicity was greater with CAF and did not increase with TAM. Overall, TAM had no benefit (DFS, P = .16; OS, P = .37), but the TAM effect differed by HR groups. For HR-positive patients, TAM was beneficial (DFS, HR = 1.32 for no TAM v TAM; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.61; P = .003; OS, HR = 1.26; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.61; P = .03), but not for HR-negative patients (DFS, HR = 0.81 for no TAM v TAM; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.03; OS, HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.05). CONCLUSION: CAF did not improve DFS compared with CMF; there was a slight effect on OS. Given greater toxicity, we cannot conclude CAF to be superior to CMF. TAM is effective in HR-positive disease, but not in HR-negative disease.     

A randomised factorial trial of sequential doxorubicin and CMF vs CMF and chemotherapy alone vs chemotherapy followed by goserelin plus tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment of node-positive breast cancer

The sequential doxorubicin --> CMF (CMF=cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil) regimen has never been compared to CMF in a randomised trial. The role of adding goserelin and tamoxifen after chemotherapy is unclear. In all, 466 premenopausal node-positive patients were randomised to: (a) CMF x 6 cycles (CMF); (b) doxorubicin x 4 cycles followed by CMF x 6 cycles (A --> CMF); (c) CMF x 6 cycles followed by goserelin plus tamoxifen x 2 years (CMF --> GT); and (d) doxorubicin x 4 cycles followed by CMF x 6 cycles followed by goserelin plus tamoxifen x 2 years (A --> CMF --> GT). The study used a 2 x 2 factorial experimental design to assess: (1) the effect of the chemotherapy regimens (CMF vs A --> CMF or arms a+c vs b+d) and (2) the effect of adding GT after chemotherapy (arms a+b vs c+d). At a median follow-up of 72 months, A --> CMF as compared to CMF significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) with a multivariate hazard ratio (HR)=0.740 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.556-0.986; P=0.040) and produced a nonsignificant improvement of overall survival (OS) (HR=0.764; 95% CI: 0.489-1.193). The addition of GT after chemotherapy significantly improved DFS (HR=0.74; 95% CI: 0.555-0.987; P=0.040), with a nonsignificant improvement of OS (HR=0.84; 95% CI: 0.54-1.32). A --> CMF is superior to CMF. Adding GT after chemotherapy is beneficial for premenopausal node-positive patients.     

Evaluation of the prognostic and predictive value of p53 and Bcl-2 in breast cancer patients participating in a randomized study with dose-dense sequential adjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic and predictive significance of p53 and Bcl-2 protein expression in high risk patients with breast cancer treated with dose-dense sequential chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From June 1997 until November 2000, 595 patients were randomized to three cycles of epirubicin (E) 110 mg/m2 followed by three cycles of paclitaxel (P) 250 mg/m2 followed by three cycles of 'intensified' CMF (cyclophosphamide 840 mg/m2, methotrexate 47 mg/m2 and fluorouracil 840 mg/m2) or to four cycles of E, followed by four cycles of CMF. p53 and Bcl-2 expression was investigated by immunohistochemistry in 392 and 397 patients respectively. RESULTS: Positive expression of p53 was detected in 104 (26.5%) patients and was significantly associated with negative hormonal status, worse histologic grade, higher incidence of disease relapse and higher rate of death. p53 positive expression was a significant negative predictor of overall survival (OS) (P = 0.002) and disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.001). Negative expression of Bcl-2 was detected in 203 (51%) patients and was significantly associated with negative hormonal status. Multivariate analysis revealed that, positive p53 expression, higher number of positive nodes and worse tumor grade were related to significantly poorer OS and DFS. CONCLUSIONS: For both treatments, p53 positive expression was a significant negative prognostic factor for OS and DFS while Bcl-2 was not. No predictive ability of p53 status or Bcl-2 status for paclitaxel treatment was evident.     

Randomized clinical trial of adjuvant fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for patients with fast-proliferating, node-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The prospective applicability of new biologic tumor information to personalize adjuvant treatment of women with operable breast cancer remains to be demonstrated. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether patients with fast-proliferating, node-negative breast cancer could benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Beginning in November 1989, we analyzed the proliferative activity of primary tumors in a consecutive series of women with node-negative breast cancer to identify subgroups of patients with a worse prognosis and who were therefore suitable candidates for adjuvant systemic therapy. Proliferative activity was determined by means of the [3H]-thymidine incorporation assay using an autoradiographic technique. Women with fast-proliferating breast cancer ([3H]-thymidine labeling index, > 2.3%) were randomized to receive either six cycles of adjuvant FEC or no adjuvant therapy until disease progression. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty-five and 123 patients treated with radical surgery for pT1 to T2, N0, M0 breast cancer were randomized to the FEC and control arms, respectively. After a median follow-up of 70 months, 27 events (21.6%) were observed in the FEC arm and 39 (32.2%) in the control arm, with a significantly lower number of locoregional relapses in the FEC group. Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81% in the FEC group and 69% in the control group (P <.02 by log-rank test). Cox multivariate analysis described the impact of adjuvant therapy with FEC on DFS as independent of the patients' main clinical-pathologic characteristics. CONCLUSION: FEC adjuvant polychemotherapy seems able to significantly improve the clinical outcome of patients with fast-proliferating, node-negative breast cancer.     

Randomized trial comparing six versus three cycles of epirubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal, node-positive breast cancer patients: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 01 trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the duration and dose intensity of epirubicin-based regimens in premenopausal patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1986 and 1990, 621 patients with operable breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive fluorouracil (Roche SA, Basel, Switzerland) 500 mg/m2, epirubicin (Pharmacia SA, Milan, Italy) 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide (Asta Medica AG, Frankfurt, Germany) 500 mg/m2 every 21 days (FEC 50) for six cycles (6 FEC 50); FEC 50 for three cycles (3 FEC 50); or the same regimen with epirubicin 75 mg/m2 (FEC 75) for three cycles (3 FEC 75). All patients in the three arms received chest wall irradiation at the end of the third cycle. RESULTS: After a 131-month median follow-up, the 10-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 53.4%, 42.5%, and 43.6% (P =.05) in the three arms, respectively. Pairwise comparisons demonstrate that 6 FEC 50 was superior both to 3 FEC 50 (P =.02) and to 3 FEC 75 (P =.05). The 10-year overall survival (OS) for the 6 FEC 50 arm was 64.3%, for the 3 FEC 50 arm it was 56.6%, and for the 3 FEC 75 arm, it was 59.7% (P =.25), respectively. Pairwise comparisons demonstrate that 6 FEC 50 was more effective than 3 FEC 50 (P =.10). Cox regression analysis demonstrates that OS was significantly better in the 6 FEC 50 than in the 3 FEC 50 arm (P =.046). No severe infections (grade 3 to 4), acute cardiac toxicity, or deaths from toxicity have been observed. Only five patients developed delayed cardiac dysfunctions, and three patients developed acute myeloblastic leukemia. CONCLUSION: After a long-term follow-up in an adjuvant setting, the benefit of six cycles of FEC 50 compared with three cycles, whatever the dose, is highly significant in terms of DFS. As regards OS, the group receiving six cycles of FEC 50 has significantly better results than the group receiving three cycles of FEC 50.