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.     

Randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil with node-positive breast cancer in Japan

Background

To compare the cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy and the anthracycline-containing regimen cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the latter.

Methods

A total of 294 patients with axillary node-positive primary breast cancer of STAGE I–IIIa were randomly assigned to either CEF [cyclophosphamide (CPA) 500 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8; epirubicin (EPI) 60 mg/m² i.v. day 1; and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 500 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8] or CMF [CPA 500 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8; methotrexate (MTX) 40 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8; and 5-FU 500 mg/m² i.v. days 1 and 8]. Both treatment regimens were comprised of six cycles at 4-week intervals. Tamoxifen (TAM) 20 mg/day was concomitantly given to estrogen receptor (ER)-positive patients and those with undetermined ER status for 2 years.

Results

The overall 5-year survival was 77.1% for CEF and 71.4% for CMF [p = 0.24; hazard ratio 0.79 (95% CI 0.50–1.24)], and the 5-year disease-free survival was 55.7% for CEF and 48.9% for CMF [p = 0.15; hazard ratio 0.80 (95% CI 0.57–1.12)]. Although the log-rank test did not show a significant difference, both overall and disease-free survivals were higher for CEF according to the point estimates. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurred more frequently in CEF.

Conclusion

Whereas CEF had a good trend compare with CMF, it could not be proven statistically significant. The principal cause of the failure seems to be insufficient power, that is, the dose intensity (EPI: 60 mg/m²) set 10 years ago, when the trial began, was low, and the number of trial subjects was small because of the background of the times, which made the accumulation of cases extremely difficult. However, the trial should be considered to be meaningful, as it was the first, formally conducted controlled trial on chemotherapy in Japan.     

retrospective analysis of topoisomerase IIa amplifications and deletions as predictive markers in primary breast cancer patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil or cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the predictive value of HER2 and topoisomerase IIalpha gene (TOP2A) for the efficacy of epirubicin in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group trial 89D, 980 pre- and postmenopausal primary patients were randomly allocated to either CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil; n = 500) or CEF (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil; n = 480) times 9, between January 1990 and November 1999. Tumor tissue was retrospectively identified from 805 patients and was analyzed for HER2-positivity and for TOP2A-amplifications and deletions. RESULTS: HER2-positivity was found in 33% of the 805 investigated tumors and was not a predictive marker for epirubicin sensitivity. TOP2A changes were identified in 23% of the 773 investigated tumors: 12% had TOP2A amplifications and 11% had TOP2A deletions. We found that patients with TOP2A amplification had an increased recurrence-free (RFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.78) and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.13), respectively if treated with CEF compared with CMF, and that patients with TOP2A deletions had an almost identical hazard ratio (RFS: HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.11; OS: HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.04). This is in contrast to patients with a normal TOP2A genotype for whom similar outcome was observed in both treatment arms (RFS: HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.17; OS: HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.17). CONCLUSION: TOP2A amplification-and possibly deletion-seems to be predictive markers for the effect of adjuvant epirubicin containing therapy in primary breast cancer, but a final conclusion has to await a confirmative study or a meta-analysis.     

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.     

TIMP-1 in combination with HER2 and TOP2A for prediction of benefit from adjuvant anthracyclines in high-risk breast cancer patients

HER2 amplification, TOP2A aberrations, and absence of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP-1) expression in breast carcinomas have been shown to be associated with incremental benefit from anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy, and this study was undertaken to validate these findings in a similar, but independent, randomized clinical trial. TIMP-1 was examined by immunohistochemistry in archival tumor tissue from 403 of 716 premenopausal high-risk patients with known HER2 and TOP2A status who were randomized to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in the MA.5 trial. Ninety-eight (24%) patients had no TIMP-1 staining of tumor cells, 27% were HER2 amplified, and 18% were TOP2A aberrant. Forty-four percentage was classified as HT responsive (HER2 amplified and/or TIMP-1 negative) and 37% as 2T responsive (TOP2A aberrant and/or TIMP-1 negative). There was no heterogeneity in treatment effect of CEF versus CMF according to TIMP-1. In HT-responsive patients, CEF was superior to CMF with an improved RFS (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42-0.97), but this was not significant for OS (adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.42-1.04). A significant HT profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.03). In 2T-responsive patients, CEF seemed to improve RFS compared to CMF (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.43-1.03) and improved OS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.93). A significant 2T profile versus treatment interaction was detected for OS (P = 0.01). With this study, we validate a more substantial reduction in mortality by CEF compared to CMF in patients with an HT- or 2T-responsive profile; however, we could not show a similarly significant reduction in RFS events, where a benefit of CEF over CMF was found irrespective of TIMP-1 status. Further studies are necessary before the HT and 2T profiles may be used to direct the use of anthracyclines.     

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.     

Final results of a randomized phase III trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with a dose-intensified epirubicin and cyclophosphamide + filgrastim as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer: an EORTC-NCIC-SAKK multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of a standard anthracycline-based regimen to a dose-intensified anthracycline regimen in locally advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Locally advanced breast cancer patients were randomly assigned onto a study comparing cyclophosphamide (C; 75 mg/m(2) orally days 1 to 14), epirubicin (E; 60 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV] days 1, 8), and fluorouracil (F; 500 mg/m(2) IV days 1, 8) six cycles every 28 days versus E (120 mg/m(2) IV day 1), C (830 mg/m(2) IV day 1), and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim; 5 micro g/kg/d subcutaneously days 2 to 13) six cycles every 14 days. The study was designed to detect a 15% improvement; that is, from 50% to 65% in median progression-free survival (PFS) in favor of the dose-intensified regimen. RESULTS: A total of 448 patients were enrolled over a period of 3 years. The median dose intensity delivered for C and E reached, respectively, 85% and 87% of that planned in the CEF arm and 96% and 95% of that planned in the EC arm. The dose-intensified arm was slightly more emetogenic and generated more grade 3 to 4 anemia but less febrile neutropenia episodes. After a median follow-up of 5.5 years, 277 events have been reported. The median PFS was 34 and 33.7 months for CEF and EC, respectively (P =.68), and the 5-year survival rate was 53% and 51% for CEF and EC, respectively (P =.94). CONCLUSION: Dose-intensified EC does not provide a measurable therapeutic benefit over CEF as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for unselected locally advanced breast cancer patients.     

Burdens and benefits of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil and tamoxifen for elderly patients with breast cancer: the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VII.

PURPOSE: Information on the tolerability and efficacy of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for older women is limited. We studied these issues using the data collected as part of the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VII. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with operable, node-positive breast cancer were randomized to receive either tamoxifen alone for 5 years (306 patients) or tamoxifen plus three consecutive cycles of classical cyclophosphamide (100 mg/m(2) orally days 1 to 14), methotrexate (40 mg/m(2) intravenous days 1 and 8), and fluorouracil (600 mg/m(2) intravenous days 1 and 8) every 28 days (CMF; 302 patients). The median follow-up was 8.0 years. RESULTS: Among the 299 patients who received at least one dose of CMF, women 65 years of age or older (n = 76) had higher grades of toxicity compared with women less than 65 years old (n = 223) (P =.004). More women in the older age group compared with the younger women experienced grade 3 toxicity of any type (17% v 7%, respectively), grade 3 hematologic toxicity (9% v 5%, respectively), and grade 3 mucosal toxicity (4% v 1%, respectively). Older patients also received less than their expected CMF dose compared with younger postmenopausal women (P =.0008). The subjective burdens of treatment, however, were similar for younger and older patients based on quality-of-life measures (performance status, coping, physical well-being, mood, and appetite). For older patients, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 63% for CMF plus tamoxifen and 61% for tamoxifen alone (hazards ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 1.52; P =.99). For younger patients, the corresponding 5-year DFS rates were 61% and 53% (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.91; P =.008), but the test for heterogeneity of CMF effect according to age group was not statistically significant. The reduced effectiveness of CMF among older women could not be attributed to dose reductions according to dose received. CONCLUSION: CMF tolerability and effectiveness were both reduced for older patients compared with younger postmenopausal node-positive breast cancer patients who received tamoxifen for 5 years. The development and evaluation of less toxic and more effective chemotherapy regimens are required for high-risk elderly patients.     

Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in patients with axillary node-positive breast cancer: an update of the Guy's/Manchester trial

Between 1976 and 1985, 391 patients (202 premenopausal, 189 postmenopausal) with operable breast cancer and positive axillary lymph nodes were randomized after total mastectomy and axillary clearance to receive cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) (n = 193) or no adjuvant therapy (n = 198). After a median follow-up of 8 years, both relapse-free survival (RFS) and survival (S) were significantly prolonged in premenopausal patients receiving CMF (RFS, P less than .001; S, P = .003). Treatment with CMF resulted in a significant improvement in RFS in premenopausal patients both with steroid receptor-positive and steroid receptor-negative tumors and also in subgroups of premenopausal patients defined by the number of axillary nodes involved. Premenopausal patients who developed permanent amenorrhea following CMF had a significantly better RFS than those who continued to menstruate. Induction of amenorrhea following CMF was related to age, with almost all patients over 40 years becoming amenorrheic. For patients less than or equal to 40 years, development of amenorrhea following CMF did not influence outcome. No difference was detected between control and CMF groups (RFS, P = .9; S, P = .9) in postmenopausal patients nor in any subgroup of these patients. The results of this trial of the efficacy of CMF for improving RFS and S have strengthened with longer follow-up.     

Cyclophosphamide,methotrexate, and fluorouracil; oral cyclophosphamide; levamisole; or no adjuvant therapy for patients with high‐risk,premenopausal breast cancer

BACKGROUND:

The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) 77B trial examined the relative efficacy of levamisole, single‐agent oral cyclophosphamide, and the classic combination of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5‐fluorouracil (CMF) against no adjuvant systemic therapy in high‐risk breast cancer patients. The authors report the results from that trial after a potential follow‐up of 25 years.

METHODS:

Between 1977 and 1983, 1146 premenopausal patients who had tumors >5 cm or positive axillary lymph nodes were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 options: no systemic therapy, levamisole 5 mg weekly for 48 weeks (the levamisole arm), oral cyclophosphamide 130 mg/m² on Days 1 through 14 every 4 weeks for 12 cycles (the C arm), or oral cyclophosphamide 80 mg/m² on Days 1 through 14 plus methotrexate 30 mg/m² and fluorouracil 500 mg/m² intravenously on Days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks for 12 cycles (the CMF arm).

RESULTS:

The 10‐year invasive disease‐free survival (IDFS) rate was 38.6% in the control arm compared with 55.5% in the C arm, 48.8% in the CMF arm, and 35.2% in the levamisole arm. Compared with the control arm, the hazard ratio for an IDFS event was 0.62 in the C arm (P = .001) and 0.70 in the CMF arm (P = .01). The hazard ratio for death was 0.70 in both the C arm (P = .02) and the CMF arm (P = .02) at 10 years, and the overall survival (OS) benefit was maintained during 25 years of follow‐up. No significant differences were observed in IDFS or OS between the C arm and the CMF arm or between the levamisole arm and the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS:

Compared with controls, both cyclophosphamide and CMF significantly improved disease‐free survival and OS, and the benefits persisted for at least 25 years in premenopausal patients who had high‐risk breast cancer. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in premenopausal women with axillary lymph node positive breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial was to determine whether a combination chemotherapy regimen that contains anthracycline (doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide [AC]) is superior to the conventional cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil [CMF] combination in premenopausal women with axillary lymph node positive Stage II breast carcinoma. METHODS: Premenopausal women with lymph node positive breast carcinoma were stratified according to age (younger than 35 or 35 years or older) and the number of positive axillary lymph nodes (1-3, 4-9, or >/= 10) and then randomly assigned to receive either doxorubicin 40 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks or cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m(2) orally on Days 1 through 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) and 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) i.v. on Days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks. Both arms were scheduled for six cycles. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 57 months. Eighteen of the 55 AC patients developed recurrence compared with 16 of the 69 CMF patients. The corresponding 5-year recurrence free survival rates were 64% and 78%, respectively (P = 0.12). The site of the first recurrence for AC patients was locoregional in 7%, distant in 22%, and combined in 4%. The corresponding data for the CMF arm were 4%, 16%, and 3%, respectively. Six AC patients died compared with 9 CMF patients. The corresponding 5-year survival rates were 90% and 86%, respectively (P = 0.96). More leukopenia (52%, mostly Grade 1-2) occurred in the CMF arm than in the AC arm (33%, P = 0.001), but no febrile episode was accompanied with leukopenia. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no difference between AC and CMF with respect to both disease free and overall survival rates in premenopausal women with axillary lymph node positive breast carcinoma.     

Tamoxifen in high-risk premenopausal women with primary breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Report from the Danish Breast Cancer co-operative Group DBCG 82B Trial

Following modified radical mastectomy, pre- and perimenopausal (amenorrhoea for < 5 years) patients with stage II or III breast cancer received CMF (cyclophosphamide 600, methotrexate 40, 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) every 4 weeks, 9 cycles). The effect on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of the addition of adjuvant tamoxifen (TAM) to adjuvant chemotherapy was examined by randomisation either to no additional treatment (n = 314), or concurrently TAM 30 mg daily for 1 year (n = 320). 40% had positive, 12% negative and 48% unknown receptor status. One year after surgery 21% versus 35% (CMF + TAM versus CMF) were still menstruating (P < 0.01). With a median follow-up of 12.2 years there was no difference in RFS (10-year RFS 34% versus 35%, P = 0.81) or OS (45% versus 46%, P = 0.73). In a Cox proportional hazards model, tumour size, number of metastatic lymph nodes, frequency of metastatic nodes in relation to total number of nodes removed, degree of anaplasia, age, and menostasia within the first year after operation were significant independent prognostic factors for RFS, and the same factors except age for OS. No significant interactions with TAM were seen. Thus, in this group of pre- and perimenopausal high-risk early breast cancer patients with heterogeneous receptor status given CMF i.v., concurrent TAM for 1 year did not improve the outcome. These results do not exclude that receptor positive patients may benefit from adjuvant TAM for longer periods given sequentially to chemotherapy.     

Accelerated-intensified cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) compared with standard CEF in metastatic breast cancer patients: results of a multicenter, randomized phase III study of the Italian Gruppo Oncologico Nord-Ouest-Mammella Inter Gruppo Group.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether an accelerated-intensified cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) chemotherapy regimen with the support of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) induces a higher activity and efficacy compared with standard CEF in metastatic breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Stage IV breast cancer patients were randomized to receive as first-line chemotherapy either standard CEF (cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2), epirubicin 60 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2)) administered every 21 days (CEF21) or accelerated-intensified CEF (cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m(2), epirubicin 80 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2)) administered every 14 days (HD-CEF14) with the support of G-CSF. Treatment was administered for eight cycles. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were randomized (74 patients on the CEF21 arm and 77 on the HD-CEF14 arm). In both arms, the median number of administered cycles was eight. The dose-intensity actually administered was 93% and 86% of that planned, in CEF21- and HD-CEF14-treated patients, respectively. Compared with the CEF21 arm, the dose-intensity increase in the HD-CEF14 arm was 80%. Both nonhematologic and hematologic toxicities were higher in the HD-CEF14 arm than in the CEF21 arm. During chemotherapy, four deaths occurred in the HD-CEF14 arm. No difference in overall response rate (complete plus partial responses) was observed: 49% and 51% in the CEF21 and HD-CEF14 arms, respectively (P =.94). A slightly non-statistically significant higher percentage of complete response was observed in the HD-CEF14 arm (20% v 15%). No difference in efficacy was observed. The median time to progression was 14.3 and 12.8 months in the CEF21 and HD-CEF14 arms, respectively (P =.69). Median overall survival was 32.7 and 27.2 months in the CEF21 and HD-CEF14 arms, respectively (P =.16). CONCLUSION: In metastatic breast cancer patients, an 80% increase in dose-intensity of the CEF regimen, obtained by both acceleration and dose intensification, does not improve the activity and the efficacy compared with a standard dose-intensity CEF regimen.     

Polyadenylic-polyuridylic acid plus locoregional and pelvic radiotherapyversus chemotherapy with CMF as adjuvants in operable breast cancer

Summary In this study, patients with operable breast cancer T2 or T3, treated by mastectomy + axillary dissection and with invaded axillary nodes (N+), were randomized to receive either: 1) postoperative locoregional and pelvic radiotherapy (RX) and Poly(A).Poly(U) (AU), 60 mg IV once a week for 6 weeks, or 2) CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/sqm P.O. on days 1–14, methotrexate 40 mg/sqm IV on day 1 and 8, fluorouracil 600 mg/sqm IV on day 1 and 8; monthly cycle, for 6 months.Between March 1982 and December 1985, 517 patients were enrolled, 257 of whom were treated by RX + AU and 260 with CMF. The main clinical, pathological and prognostic characteristics were equally distributed in the two groups. The present analysis was conducted after a mean follow-up of 69 months (S.D.=13). There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups (test adjusted by center and menopausal status); the five-year OS rate was 74% in the RXAU group and 77% in the CMF group. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was significantly higher (p=0.05) in the RXAU group compared to the CMF group; the five-year RFS rates were 57% and 46% in the two groups respectively.This short, well-tolerated combined RXAU treatment appears to be as efficient as CMF and might offer an alternative to chemo- or hormonotherapy, in case of contraindications to these treatments.     

The feasibility of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) for pre- and post-menopausal node-positive breast cancer patients in a Belgian multicentric trial: a study of consistency in relative dose intensity (RDI) and cumulative doses across institutions.

BACKGROUND: Classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) including oral cyclophosphamide is still considered an important adjuvant chemotherapy regimen in patients with early breast cancer (BC). Concern has been raised regarding the feasibility of this regimen, especially in postmenopausal patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 254 pre- and post-menopausal node-positive BC patients aged < or = 70 years received six cycles of CMF in the context of a Belgian multicentric phase III trial of adjuvant chemotherapy. CMF dose and schedule were as follows: cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 p.o. on days 1 to 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) on days 1 and 8, 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/ml i.v. on days 1 and 8; cycles q. 28 days. The relative dose intensity (RDI) was calculated as the ratio between the delivered DI and the planned DI. We also analysed the RDI in two subgroups of patients with age > or = 50 years or < 50 years. RESULTS: Overall, the percentage of patients ending the six cycles of the planned CMF regimen was 90%. The mean RDI achieved in the population of 254 patients was 90% (range 8% to 129%). The subgroup analysis of patients aged > or = 50 years and < 50 years showed that 81% and 76% of patients, respectively, received > or = 80% of the planned chemotherapy dose intensity (P = 0.33). No statistically significant difference was found between the percentage of patients who received a RDI < 80% and the participating institutions (P = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: The classical CMF regimen was a feasible regimen in the context of a multicentric trial, in which academic institutions as well as community hospitals participated. No substantial differences in RDI and cumulative doses were found in relation to a patient's age and the participating institution.     

Epirubicin versus CMF as adjuvant therapy for stage I and II breast cancer: a prospective randomised study

We compared a relatively short regimen of monochemotherapy with epirubicin versus polychemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) as adjuvant treatment for stage I and II breast cancer patients. 348 patients with oestrogen receptor negative (ER-) node negative and ER- or ER+ node-positive with <10 nodes were accrued. CMF was given intravenously (i.v.) on days 1 and 8, every 4 weeks, for six courses; epirubicin was given weekly for 4 months. Postmenopausal patients received tamoxifen for 3 years. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and event-free survival (EFS). Outcome evaluation was performed both in eligible patients and in all randomised patients according to the intention-to-treat principle. 8 randomised patients were considered ineligible. At a median follow-up of 8 years, there was no difference in OS (Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.11, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.77-1.61, P=0.58), EFS (HR=1.14, 95% CI: 0.78-1.64, P=0.48), and RFS (HR=1.14, 95% CI: 0.8-1.64, P=0.48) between the two arms for all of the patients. At 8 years, the RFS percentages (+/-Standard Error (S.E.)) were 65.4% (+/-4%) in the CMF arm and 62.7% (+/-4%) in the epirubicin arm; for EFS these were 64.2% (+/-4%) for CMF and 60.8% (+/-4%) for epirubicin, respectively. A significant difference in RFS (P=0.015) was observed in patients with 4-9 positive nodes in favour of the CMF arm. Toxicity in the two arms was superimposable except for more frequent grade 3 alopecia in the epirubicin-treated patients (P=0.001). Overall, at a median follow-up of 8 years, there were no differences between the two arms in terms of OS, EFS and RFS.     

Vincristine, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide versus low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil in advanced breast cancer: a randomized trial of the Piedmont Oncology Association

Eighty-one evaluable patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive either vincristine 1 mg/m2, doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 on day one and cyclophosphamide 200 mg/m2 orally days 3-6 (VAC); or cyclophosphamide 350 mg/m2, methotrexate 20 mg/m2, and 5-fluorouracil 350 mg/m2 (CMF) intravenously, all on day 1. Courses of each of the above regimens were repeated every three weeks. Twenty-one of 45 patients (47%) on VAC and seven of 44 patients (16%) on CMF had complete or partial response (P less than 0.05). The duration of response was six months for CMF and nine months for VAC. Hematologic toxicity was minimal for both groups but three patients receiving VAC developed cardiac toxicity. Overall survival projections at this time indicate no differences between the VAC or CMF treated patients.     

A randomized multicenter trial comparing mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil with doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and fluorouracil in the therapy of metastatic breast carcinoma

Three hundred thirty-one women with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive combination chemotherapy with either cyclophosphamide, Novantrone (mitoxantrone; Lederle Laboratories, Wayne, NJ), and fluorouracil (CNF) or cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin (doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH), and fluorouracil (CAF). Patients could not have had prior chemotherapy, although adjuvant chemotherapy was acceptable. Initial doses were 500 mg/m2 of cyclophosphamide and 500 mg/m2 of fluorouracil with either 10 mg/m2 of mitoxantrone or 50 mg/m2 of doxorubicin, administered intravenously (IV) on day 1 and repeated every 3 weeks. There were no statistically significant differences in pretreatment or prior therapy characteristics between the groups. For patients assigned to the CNF and CAF groups, respectively, 25 (18%) were premenopausal, 39 (40%) were estrogen receptor (ER) negative, 39 (38%) had a disease-free interval less than 1 year, and 24 (26%) had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. All patients were compared for response rate, duration of response, time to progression or death, time to treatment failure (TTF), and survival. None of these parameters were statistically significant favoring one regimen over the other. The response rate (complete [CR] and partial response [PR]) was 29% for the CNF group (95% confidence interval of 22% to 37%) and 37% for the CAF group (95% confidence interval of 29% to 45%). The median response duration and TTF were 171 days and 125 days for the CNF group and 254 days and 147 days for the CAF group, respectively. The median survival times for the CNF group and the CAF group were 377 and 385 days, respectively. The major dose-limiting toxicity for both regimens was leukopenia, manifested as granulocytopenia. The incidence of stomatitis/mucositis was 10% in the CNF group and 19% in the CAF group. Alopecia occurred in 49% of CNF patients (severely for 4%) and in 86% of CAF patients (severely for 39%). Nausea/vomiting occurred in 80% of CNF patients and in 81% of CAF patients; the degree of severity was also comparable. There was significantly less cardiotoxicity observed in the CNF group compared with the CAF group. Although CNF is somewhat less effective in overall response rate, survival curves are identical. CNF can be offered to patients who reject anthracycline-containing regimens because of fear of alopecia.     

Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression as adjuvant treatment of estrogen receptor-positive pre-/perimenopausal breast cancer patients: results of the Italian Breast Cancer Adjuvant Study Group 02 randomized trial. boccardo@hp380.ist.unige.it.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of chemotherapy versus that of tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression in pre-/perimenopausal estrogen receptor-positive patients with early breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either six cycles of a standard regimen of cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m(2) orally days 1 to 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) days 1 and 8, and fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2) IV days 1 and 8 (CMF), with all drugs restarted on day 29, or 5 years of tamoxifen, 30 mg/d, plus ovarian suppression with surgical oophorectomy, ovarian irradiation, or monthly goserelin 3.6-mg injections. Disease-free survival was the main study end point. Overall survival and toxicity were additional end points. RESULTS: Between 1989 and 1997, 120 patients were assigned to CMF and 124 to tamoxifen and ovarian suppression (oophorectomy, n = 6; ovarian irradiation, n = 31; and goserelin injections, n = 87). At the time of analysis (median follow-up time, 76 months; range, 9 to 121 months), 82 patients had relapsed and 39 had died. No difference between groups had emerged with respect to either disease-free or overall survival. Treatments were comparable even in respect to age, tumor size, and nodal status, although a nonsignificant trend favored patients with poorly differentiated tumors treated with CMF. Leukopenia, nausea, vomiting, stomatitis, and alopecia were significantly more common in patients treated with CMF. There were few patients who developed benign gynecologic changes in either group, and numbers were comparable. CONCLUSION: The combination of tamoxifen with ovarian suppression seems to be safe and to yield comparable results relative to standard CMF.     

Phase III trial of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, fluorouracil (CEF) versus cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, fluorouracil (CNF) in women with metastatic breast cancer

Background: The mitoxantrone combination CNF and the epirubicin combination CEF have shown similar activity and less toxicity than the standard CAF combination in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). A prospective randomised study was started to compare safety and activity between CEF and CNF administered using a classical chemotherapeutic schedule in MBC.Patients and methods: From December 1987 to June 1993, 151 patients were randomised to receive cyclophosphamide (C) 100mgm^–2 p.o. days 1–14, fluorouracil (F) 500mgm^–2 i.v. days 1 and 8, and epirubicin (E) 30mgm^–2 i.v. days 1 and 8, or mitoxantrone (N) 6 mgm^–2 i.v. days 1 and 8, every 4 weeks. Seventythree patients were eligible for CEF and 72 for CNF.Results: Objective responses were observed in 61.6 of the CEF group and 44.4 in CNF group (p=0.004). The median duration of response was 64 weeks in CEF and 50 weeks in CNF group (p=0.02) and median time to progression was 51 and 33 weeks, respectively (p=0.0004). At the time of analysis, all except six patients (one in CNF and five in CEF) had died and the median survival time in the CEF group was longer than in CNF (74.4 weeks vs 51.4 weeks; log-rank ² test p=0.015). CNF produced more hematologic toxicity than CEF (WHO scale; grades 2–4): leucopenia 84% vs 68% (p=0.03) and trombocytopenia 17% vs 4.5% (p=0.01); CEF caused more grade 2 and 3 alopecia: 93% vs 70% (p=0.00 1).Conclusion: The combination CEF using this schedule and dosage in metastatic breast cancer is more effective with less toxicity than CNF, except for alopecia, and was associated with longer survival.