Search

Background: Receptor activator of NFkB (RANK), its ligand (RANKL) and the decoy receptor of RANKL (osteoprotegerin, OPG) play a pivotal role in bone remodeling by regulating osteoclasts formation and activity. RANKL stimulates migration of RANK-expressing tumor cells in vitro, conversely inhibited by OPG., Materials and Methods: We examined mRNA expression levels of RANKL/RANK/OPG in a publicly available microarray dataset of 295 primary breast cancer patients. We next analyzed RANK expression by immunohistochemistry in an independent series of 93 primary breast cancer specimens and investigated a possible association with clinicopathological parameters, bone recurrence and survival., Results: Microarray analysis showed that lower RANK and high OPG mRNA levels correlate with longer overall survival (P = 0.0078 and 0.0335, respectively) and disease-free survival (P = 0.059 and 0.0402, respectively). Immunohistochemical analysis of RANK showed a positive correlation with the development of bone metastases (P = 0.023) and a shorter skeletal disease-free survival (SDFS, P = 0.037). Specifically, univariate analysis of survival showed that "RANK-negative" and "RANK-positive" patients had a SDFS of 105.7 months (95% CI: 73.9-124.4) and 58.9 months (95% CI: 34.7-68.5), respectively. RANK protein expression was also associated with accelerated bone metastasis formation in a multivariate analysis (P = 0.029)., Conclusions: This is the first demonstration of the role of RANK expression in primary tumors as a predictive marker of bone metastasis occurrence and SDFS in a large population of breast cancer patients.

Background: To determine whether a dose-dense regimen improves outcome in early breast cancer patients, we compared outcomes with the same fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) chemotherapeutic regimen administered every 3 weeks (FEC21) or administered every 2 weeks (FEC14 including support with filgrastim, a granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) in a multicenter phase III randomized trial., Methods: A total of 1214 patients with early-stage breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of FEC14 (604 patients) or of FEC21 (610 patients). Study endpoints were overall survival and event-free survival. Associations were assessed by multivariable analysis with adjustment for age; tumor size; grade; proliferative rate; and menopausal, lymph node, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor status. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: Patients in the FEC14 arm had fewer dose reductions or treatment delays or discontinuation (26%) than those in the FEC21 arm (33%) (difference = 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2% to 12%; P = .008). FEC14 therapy, compared with FEC21 therapy, was associated with more asthenia (36% versus 29%, difference = 7%, 95% CI = 2% to 12%; P = .01), bone pain (33% versus 4%, difference = 29%, 95% CI = 25% to 33%; P < .001), anemia (38% versus 19%, difference = 19%, 95% CI = 14% to 24%; P < .001), and thrombocytopenia (8% versus 2%, difference = 6%, 95% CI = 4% to 9%; P < .001), but with less leukopenia (12% versus 45%, difference = 33%, 95% CI = 28% to 37%; P < .001). No acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome was observed. At a median follow-up of 10.4 years, no statistically significant difference in the hazard of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.13) or recurrence (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.71 to 1.08) was found between FEC14 and FEC21 groups after adjustment by multivariable analysis. Although the study was underpowered for subset analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of the treatment type was associated with any of the potential prognostic factors., Conclusion: Our results support the long-term safety of FEC14 chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. However, this therapy was not associated with improved outcome, but because of the limited statistical power of our study, we cannot rule out a modest improvement in outcome associated with FEC14 therapy.

Purpose: To determine whether switching patients from tamoxifen to antiaromatase treatment would prevent some of the relapses or deaths that we assume would occur if tamoxifen were continued., Patients and Methods: Three hundred eighty postmenopausal breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for 3 years were randomized to either continue tamoxifen for 2 more years or to switch to low-dose aminoglutethimide (250 mg daily) for 2 years., Results: At a median follow-up of 61 months (range, 5 to 94 months), 59 events occurred in the tamoxifen group, and 55 occurred in the aminoglutethimide group. More treatment failures at distant sites, such as viscera (P =.02), were observed in the tamoxifen group. Although no differences in disease-free survival between the two groups have emerged so far, a significant trend favors aminoglutethimide in overall survival (P =.005) and breast cancer-specific survival (P =.06). Even if more patients in the antiaromatase group complained of drug-related side effects and more of them discontinued treatment (P =.0001), the number of cardiovascular events and, in general, of life-threatening adverse events was higher in the tamoxifen arm., Conclusion: Switching patients from tamoxifen to aminoglutethimide treatment resulted in comparable event-free survival, but longer overall survival was achieved in patients who were switched to aminoglutethimide as compared with those who continued to receive tamoxifen. Should these preliminary results be confirmed by larger studies with a similar design, which are now testing the effectiveness of the new, more active, and tolerable aromatase inhibitors, sequencing tamoxifen with an aromatase inhibitor could become a preferable alternative to tamoxifen alone in early breast cancer patients.

We have carried out a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a combination therapy consisting of mitoxantrone 10 mg/sqm i.v. on day 1, levo-leucovorin 250 mg/sqm administered over 2 hours and 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/sqm i.v. push after the first hour of levo-leucovorin infusion, on days 15-16 (MFL) in patients aged more than 65 years. 24 patients with advanced breast cancer entered the study: 16 aged 65-70 yrs, 4 patients 70-75 yrs, and 4 > 75 yrs. Median PS was 1 (range 0-2); sites of metastases were: bone 14 patients, viscera 14 patients, soft tissue 11 patients, and CNS 1 patient. A median number of 6 cycles (range 3-9) was administered. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity; partial response was obtained in 12 (50%) patients (95% C.I 30-70), stable disease was observed in 9 patients (37.5%), while 3 patients (12.5%) progressed. Median progression-free survival and survival were 9 months (range 2-14) and 14 months (range 5-36), respectively. Toxicity was generally mild and the most frequently observed side-effects were WHO gr. 1-2 leukopenia in 6/24 (25%) patients and gr. 1-2 emesis in 10/24 (41.6%) pts. 1 patient pretreated with doxorubicin cumulative dose of 240 mg/sqm showed clinical signs of congestive heart failure (NYHA grade 1) after the fifth cycle of treatment. MFL is a well tolerated regimen and could represent a safe and effective treatment in older advanced breast cancer patients.

Sixty patients with stage IIIA and IIIB breast cancer have been treated with a combined modality approach including induction chemotherapy, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy: 74.5% of patients achieved an objective response after 3 cycles of induction chemotherapy, and 98.3% of patients were rendered disease-free after induction chemotherapy and surgery or radiotherapy; at 4 years, actuarial survival and disease-free survival are 71.5% and 43%, respectively. These results are significantly better than our historical control, and locally advanced breast cancer must now be considered a curable disease when treated with an aggressive multimodal approach.