Randomized trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer: update of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Trial MA5.

PURPOSE: Certain anthracycline-containing adjuvant chemotherapy regimens are associated with improved relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with the classic regimen of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in women with early-stage breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1989 and 1993, 710 pre- and perimenopausal women with axillary node-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned to either cyclophosphamide 75 mg/m(2) orally days 1 through 14, epirubicin 60 mg/m(2) intravenously days 1 and 8, and fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2) intravenously days 1 and 8 (CEF) or CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m(2) orally days 1 through 14, methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) intravenously days 1 and 8, and fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2) intravenously days 1 and 8). On the basis of follow-up to May 1997 (median follow-up time, 59 months), there was a statistically significant improvement in RFS and OS for CEF compared with CMF. RESULTS: The trial results are now updated, with a median follow-up of 10 years for live patients. The 10-year RFS is 52% for patients who received CEF compared with 45% for CMF patients (hazard ratio [HR] for CMF v CEF = 1.31; stratified log-rank, P = .007). The 10-year OS for patients who received CEF and CMF are 62% and 58%, respectively (HR for CMF v CEF = 1.18; stratified log-rank, P = .085). The rates of acute leukemia have not changed since the original report, whereas the rates of congestive heart failure are slightly higher but acceptable (four patients [1.1%] in the CEF group v one patient [0.3%] in the CMF group). CONCLUSION: The previously demonstrated benefit of CEF compared with CMF adjuvant chemotherapy is maintained with longer follow-up in the MA5 trial.     

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.     

Randomized trial of adjuvant tamoxifen and/or goserelin in premenopausal breast cancer--self-rated physiological effects and symptoms

After primary surgery, 149 premenopausal breast cancer patients, with node-negative disease, were randomized to one of four treatment groups: goserelin, tamoxifen, goserelin plus tamoxifen or to a systematically untreated control group. The aim was to assess the effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy in terms of physical symptoms and perception of anxiety and depressive symptoms. Assessments were made before randomization, at 3-4 months and at 12 months. Treatment with goserelin resulted in early and more intense menopausal symptoms, while the effects of tamoxifen were slower and milder. The side effects with goserelin appeared to be alleviated by concurrent tamoxifen except for vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes, sweating, feeling warm). No significant group differences were found for anxiety and depressive symptoms. In conclusion, chemical castration with goserelin was associated with the highest level of physical symptoms. The group treated with tamoxifen alone showed the lowest levels of symptoms among the treatment groups, except for vaginal discharge and irregular bleedings.     

Goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Study.

PURPOSE: Current adjuvant therapies have improved survival for premenopausal patients with breast cancer but may have short-term toxic effects and long-term effects associated with premature menopause. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days for 2 years; n = 817) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy (six 28-day cycles; n = 823) for adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer. RESULTS: Analysis was performed when 684 events had been achieved, and the median follow-up was 6 years. A significant interaction between treatment and estrogen receptor (ER) status was found (P =.0016). In ER-positive patients (approximately 74%), goserelin was equivalent to CMF for disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.20). In ER-negative patients, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS (HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.44). Amenorrhea occurred in more than 95% of goserelin patients by 6 months versus 58.6% of CMF patients. Menses returned in most goserelin patients after therapy stopped, whereas amenorrhea was generally permanent in CMF patients (22.6% v 76.9% amenorrheic at 3 years). Chemotherapy-related side effects such as nausea/vomiting, alopecia, and infection were higher with CMF than with goserelin during CMF treatment. Side effects related to estrogen suppression were initially higher with goserelin, but when goserelin treatment stopped, reduced to a level below that observed in the CMF group. CONCLUSION: Goserelin offers an effective, well-tolerated alternative to CMF in premenopausal patients with ER-positive and node-positive early breast cancer.     

Interaction between goserelin and tamoxifen in a prospective randomised clinical trial of adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal breast cancer

Ovarian ablation improves survival in premenopausal early breast cancer, but the potential added value by luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists to tamoxifen is still not clear. The purpose of our study is to examine the efficacy of the LHRH agonist goserelin for adjuvant therapy of premenopausal breast cancer, the role of interaction between goserelin and tamoxifen and the impact of estrogen receptor (ER) content. A total of 927 patients were included in the Stockholm part of the Zoladex in Premenopausal Patients (ZIPP) trial. They were randomly allocated in a 2 × 2 factorial study design to goserelin, tamoxifen, the combination of goserelin and tamoxifen or no endocrine therapy for 2 years, with or without chemotherapy. This is formally not a preplanned subset analysis presenting the end point first event. In this Stockholm sub-study, at a median follow-up of 12.3 years, goserelin reduced the risk of first event by 32% (P = 0.005) in the absence of tamoxifen, and tamoxifen reduced the risk by 27% (P = 0.018) in the absence of goserelin. The combined goserelin and tamoxifen treatment reduced the risk by 24% (P = 0.021) compared with no endocrine treatment. In highly ER-positive tumours, there were 29% fewer events among goserelin treated (P = 0.044) and a trend towards greater risk reduction depending on the level of ER content. The greatest risk reduction from goserelin treatment was observed among those not receiving tamoxifen (HR: 0.52, P = 0.007). In conclusion, goserelin as well as tamoxifen reduces the risk of recurrence in endocrine responsive premenopausal breast cancer. Women with strongly ER-positive tumours may benefit more from goserelin treatment. The combination of goserelin and tamoxifen is not superior to either modality alone. With the limitations of a subset trial, these data have to be interpreted cautiously.     

Zoledronic acid combined with adjuvant endocrine therapy of tamoxifen versus anastrozol plus ovarian function suppression in premenopausal early breast cancer: final analysis of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 12

These final results from ABCSG-12 confirm that twice-yearly ZOL safely enhances the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Tamoxifen together with Goserelin for now remains the endocrine standard of care. In general, overall survival of more than 95% at 8 years' median follow-up supports the efficacy of endocrine-only regimens in this premenopausal patient population.BackgroundZoledronic acid (ZOL) plus adjuvant endocrine therapy significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) at 48- and 62-month follow-up in the ABCSG-12 trial. We present efficacy results of a final additional analysis after 94.4 months.Patients and methodsPatients were premenopausal women who had undergone primary surgery for stage I/II estrogen-receptor-positive and/or progesterone-receptor-positive breast cancer with <10 positive lymph nodes, and were scheduled for standard goserelin therapy. All 1803 patients received goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days) and were randomized to tamoxifen (20 mg/days) or anastrozole (1 mg/days), both with or without ZOL (4 mg every 6 months) for 3 years. The primary end point was DFS; recurrence-free survival and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points.ResultsAfter 94.4-month median follow-up (range, 0–114 months), relative risks of disease progression [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60–0.99; P = 0.042] and of death (HR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.43–1.02; P = 0.064) are still reduced by ZOL although no longer significant at the predefined significance level. Overall, 251 DFS events and 86 deaths were reported. Absolute risk reductions with ZOL were 3.4% for DFS and 2.2% for OS. There was no DFS difference between tamoxifen alone versus anastrozole alone, but there was a pronounced higher risk of death for anastrozole-treated patients (HR = 1.63; 95% CI 1.05–1.45; P = 0.030). Treatments were generally well tolerated, with no reports of renal failure or osteonecrosis of the jaw.ConclusionThese final results from ABCSG 12 suggest that twice-yearly ZOL enhances the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine treatment, and this benefit is maintained long-term.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00295646 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=00295646).     

Randomized trial of observation versus adjuvant therapy with cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, prednisone with or without tamoxifen following mastectomy in postmenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer

Following mastectomy for node-positive breast cancer, 261 postmenopausal women were randomized to observation or adjuvant treatment with cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, prednisone (CFP) alone or combined with tamoxifen (T). Doses used were: C, 150 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) days 1 to 5; F, 300 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 5; P, 10 mg by mouth 3 times daily on days 1 to 7; and T, 10 mg by mouth 2 times daily. A total of ten courses of treatment, administered every 6 weeks, was planned and T was stopped 6 weeks after the last course of CFP. Two hundred thirty-four patients were fully eligible and evaluable. With a median observation time slightly in excess of 5 years, the proportion of recurrences on each arm were: CFP, 29 of 75 (39%); CFPT, 29 of 71 (41%); and observation, 50 of 88 (57%). Relapse-free survival distributions for both CFP and CFPT were superior to observation (both two-sided P = .01). Considering prognostic factors in covariate analysis revealed two-sided P = .0006 for CFP v observation and P = .0003 for CFPT v observation. No substantial difference was identified between CFP and CFPT. Survival data are not yet mature with 31% dead; and, although slight separations of the curves exist in favor of the treatment arms, no significant differences in survival have been seen. Both adjuvant therapy programs are well tolerated and there were no treatment-related deaths. Further maturation of the data is required to determine if the advantages in relapse-free survival will be translated into any overall survival benefit which must be considered the goal of primary interest.     

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.     

Randomized trial of adjuvant tamoxifen in node negative postmenopausal breast cancer. Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group.

The paper presents long-term results of a randomized trial of adjuvant tamoxifen (40 mg daily for 2 or 5 years) versus surgery alone including 1,347 postmenopausal patients with histologically negative axillary nodes and a tumour diameter less than or equal to 30 mm. Data on the estrogen receptor status of the primary tumour were available in 1,136 patients (84%). At a median follow-up of 7 years (range 1.7-13.0 years) there was a significant prolongation of the recurrence-free survival among those allocated to tamoxifen (p less than 0.01), significantly fewer deaths due to breast cancer (p = 0.02) and a trend towards improved overall survival (p = 0.11). The treatment benefit was restricted to patients with ER-positive tumours. There was no significant reduction of breast cancer recurrences in the tamoxifen group among patients whose tumours were classified as ER-negative. The results support and extend previous studies in showing a long-term benefit of tamoxifen in postmenopausal breast cancer patients with node-negative, estrogen receptor positive disease.     

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.     

Randomized trial of bilateral oophorectomy versus tamoxifen in premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer

A randomized clinical trial was performed to compare the efficacy of bilateral oophorectomy with that of tamoxifen at a dose of 10 mg twice daily in premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, and to examine the efficacy of each as a crossover treatment. Initial treatment responses were seen in ten of 27 patients (37%) treated with oophorectomy and seven of 26 patients (27%) treated with tamoxifen. The difference was not statistically significant. Crossover responses were seen in five of 15 patients (33%) treated with oophorectomy, including three responses in ten prior tamoxifen nonresponders; and two of 18 patients (11%) treated with tamoxifen. Time to progression distributions were not significantly different during initial treatment, and no significant differences in survival were noted. Thus, there was no overall disadvantage to the use of tamoxifen as opposed to oophorectomy as initial hormonal therapy, and a failure to respond to tamoxifen did not preclude a response to subsequent oophorectomy. Exploratory data analysis within subsets indicated consistent differential treatment effects in the visceral dominant patients. Of the 16 such patients treated with oophorectomy, eight (50%) experienced objective responses but there were no responses in the 14 patients treated with tamoxifen. In the nine visceral dominant crossover patients who had not responded to initial tamoxifen, three (33%) subsequently responded to oophorectomy. Time to progression distributions within the visceral dominant subset appeared to be better for the patients treated initially with oophorectomy. However, one must be very cautious in drawing conclusions from exploratory subset analyses, especially with the small sample size. Further studies would be required to test any hypothesis of differential organ site responsiveness.     

Preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen in hormone receptor-positive premenopausal breast cancer patients

Background

The use of preoperative endocrine therapy for breast cancer has increased during the last decade. Although several studies have reported favorable response rates in postmenopausal women, its effectiveness in premenopausal women remains unknown. This study therefore aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of preoperative endocrine therapy in premenopausal women.

Methods

Fifty-three patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative invasive breast cancer were included in this study. Preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen was administered for 3 months. Clinical evaluations were performed by ultrasonography before and after endocrine therapy. Pathological evaluations were performed using core biopsy and surgical specimens. Immunohistochemical evaluations of ER, progesterone receptor (PgR), HER2, and Ki-67 were performed before and after endocrine therapy.

Results

Partial response (PR) was observed in 23 % (12/53) and progressive disease (PD) in 2 % (2/53) of patients. Significant suppression of Ki-67 was observed following endocrine therapy in 90 % (47/52) of patients (P < 0.0001). Significant downregulation of PgR was observed after endocrine therapy (P = 0.0002), which tended to be correlated with clinical response (P = 0.058).

Conclusions

Three months of preoperative endocrine therapy with goserelin acetate and tamoxifen was safe and effective in premenopausal patients with invasive breast cancer, with a 23 % PR rate. Changes in PgR and Ki-67 expression might be promising markers for endocrine responsiveness.     

Randomized trial to evaluate the addition of tamoxifen to cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone adjuvant therapy in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer

A randomized clinical trial was performed to determine if the addition of hormonal therapy with tamoxifen to a combination chemotherapy regimen was superior to the chemotherapy alone for adjuvant treatment of premenopausal women after mastectomy for node-positive breast cancer. The chemotherapy regimen utilized consisted of cyclophosphamide (C), 5-fluorouracil (F), and prednisone (P), and the doses employed were: C, 150 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 5; F, 300 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 5; and P, 10 mg orally three times daily on days 1 to 7. A total of ten courses of therapy, given every 6 weeks, was planned. Tamoxifen (T) was given at a dose of 10 mg twice daily and was stopped 6 weeks after the last course of CFP. Four hundred patients are fully eligible and evaluable. With a median observation time of 5.3 years, the proportion of recurrences on each arm were: CFP, 95 of 202 (47%); CFPT, 77 of 198 (39%). The relapse-free survival distribution for CFPT was superior to that for CFP, at a borderline level of significance (two-sided P = 0.06). When significant prognostic factors were considered in covariate analysis, CFPT was not significantly better than CFP (P = 0.43). This marked change in level was due to imbalance in several factors not considered in stratification. Currently, 31% of CFP and 25% of CFPT patients have died, and although there is a slight separation of the survival curves in favor of CFPT, the difference is not significant (P = 0.21). Analysis within receptor subsets also showed no significant advantage for the addition of tamoxifen. This study does not establish a significant advantage for the concurrent administration of tamoxifen with the CFP regimen. It does, however, clearly demonstrate the importance of examination of clinically important prognostic factors, even those not utilized in stratification, and consideration of these factors in covariate analysis if imbalances are present.     

Long-term results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII: adjuvant chemotherapy plus goserelin compared with either therapy alone for premenopausal patients with node-negative breast cancer

BackgroundThe International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII compared long-term efficacy of endocrine therapy (goserelin), chemotherapy [cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF)], and chemoendocrine therapy (CMF followed by goserelin) for pre/perimenopausal women with lymph-node-negative breast cancer.Patients and methodsFrom 1990 to 1999, 1063 patients were randomized to receive (i) goserelin for 24 months (n = 346), (ii) six courses of ‘classical’ CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy (n = 360), or (iii) six courses of CMF plus 18 months goserelin (CMF→ goserelin; n = 357). Tumors were classified as estrogen receptor (ER) negative (19%), ER positive (80%), or ER unknown (1%); 19% of patients were younger than 40. Median follow-up was 12.1 years.ResultsFor the ER-positive cohort, sequential therapy provided a statistically significant benefit in disease-free survival (DFS) (12-year DFS = 77%) compared with CMF alone (69%) and goserelin alone (68%) (P = 0.04 for each comparison), due largely to the effect in younger patients. Patients with ER-negative tumors whose treatment included CMF had similar DFS (12-year DFS CMF = 67%; 12-year DFS CMF→ goserelin = 69%) compared with goserelin alone (12-year DFS = 61%, P= NS).ConclusionsFor pre/perimenopausal women with lymph-node-negative ER-positive breast cancer, CMF followed by goserelin improved DFS in comparison with either modality alone. The improvement was the most pronounced in those aged below 40, suggesting an endocrine effect of prolonged CMF-induced amenorrhea.     

Prognostic value of extracapsular tumor spread for locoregional control in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: long-term observations from International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine retrospectively whether extracapsular spread (ECS) might identify a subgroup that could benefit from radiotherapy after mastectomy, especially patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes (LN1-3+). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomized 1,475 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer to three, six, or nine courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil). After a review of all pathology forms, 933 patients (63%) had information on the presence or absence of ECS. ECS was present in 49.5%. The median follow-up was 10 years. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, ECS was associated with worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). In multivariate analyses adjusting for tumor size, vessel invasion, surgery type, and age group, ECS remained significant (DFS: hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.34 to 1.93; P < .0001; OS: 1.67; 95% CI, 1.34 to 2.08; P < .0001). However, ECS was not significant when the number of positive nodes was added. The locoregional failure rate +/- distant failure (LRF +/- distant failure) within 10 years was estimated at 19% (+/- 2%) without ECS, versus 27% (+/- 2%) with ECS. The difference was statistically significant in univariate analyses, but not after adjusting for the number of positive nodes. No independent effect of ECS on DFS, OS, or LRF could be confirmed within the subgroup of 382 patients with LN1-3+ treated with mastectomy without radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support an independent prognostic value of ECS, nor its use as an indication for irradiation in premenopausal patients with LN1-3+ treated with classical CMF. However, we could not examine whether extensive ECS is of prognostic importance.     

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.     

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

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

The Scottish trial of adjuvant tamoxifen in node-negative breast cancer. Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group.

This paper presents results, 5 years after closure, of a randomized trial comparing adjuvant with postrelapse tamoxifen in 747 women with histological node-negative breast cancer. Two hundred thirty-six disease-free patients on adjuvant therapy were secondarily randomly assigned at 5 years to stop or to continue tamoxifen until relapse. Adjuvant tamoxifen, taken for a median duration of 60 months, has significantly prolonged disease-free survival overall (P = .0001), in the 214 premenopausal group (P = .018), in the 533 postmenopausal group (P = .0026), and for the 246 patients with estrogen receptor levels greater than 19 fmol/mg of protein (P = .0032); distant relapse has also been delayed overall (P = .029). Total survival comparison by Kaplan-Meier life-table analysis shows a nonsignificant trend in the same direction (P = .07). Adjuvant tamoxifen has also reduced the incidence of contralateral breast cancer and of death from myocardial infarction. No increase in the incidence of endometrial cancer has been found.     

Adjuvant chemotherapy with adriamycin, fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, with or without tamoxifen in operable breast cancer

Between January 1982 and February 1985, 70 breast cancer patients with histologically confirmed axillary node involvement and T1-3a were treated following surgery with a combination of adriamycin, fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, with or without tamoxifen according to the estrogen and progesterone receptors state. At 60 months of study (median follow-up, 41 months), the estimated proportion remaining disease-free was 62%. The estimated survival rate was 81%. A comparison of the actuarial disease-free and overall survival with data reported in the literature indicates a similar positive effect of adjuvant systemic therapy as described in adjuvant studies using polychemotherapy regimens. Patient acception of chemotherapy regimen was generally good. This can be accounted for because of an adequate emesis control and real compliance of the patients with the oncologist.