Search

Purpose: Adjuvant! (www.adjuvantonline.com) is a web-based tool that predicts 10-year breast cancer outcomes with and without adjuvant systemic therapy, but it has not been independently validated., Methods: Using the British Columbia Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit (BCOU) database, demographic, pathologic, staging, and treatment data on 4,083 women diagnosed between 1989 and 1993 in British Columbia with T1-2, N0-1, M0 breast cancer were abstracted and entered into Adjuvant! to calculate predicted 10-year overall survival (OS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and event-free survival (EFS) for each patient. Individual BCOU observed outcomes at 10 years were independently determined. Predicted and observed outcomes were compared., Results: Across all 4,083 patients, 10-year predicted and observed outcomes were within 1% for OS, BCSS, and EFS (all P > .05). Predicted and observed outcomes were within 2% for most demographic, pathologic, and treatment-defined subgroups. Adjuvant! overestimated OS, BCSS, and EFS in women younger than age 35 years (predicted-observed = 8.6%, 9.6%, and 13.6%, respectively; all P < .001) or with lymphatic or vascular invasion (LVI; predicted-observed = 3.6%, 3.8%, and 4.2%, respectively; all P < .05); these two prognostic factors were not automatically incorporated within the Adjuvant! algorithm. After adjusting for the distribution of LVI, using the prognostic factor impact calculator in Adjuvant!, 10-year predicted and observed outcomes were no longer significantly different., Conclusion: Adjuvant! performed reliably. Patients younger than age 35 or with known additional adverse prognostic factors such as LVI require adjustment of risks to derive reliable predictions of prognosis without adjuvant systemic therapy and the absolute benefits of adjuvant systemic therapy.

Purpose: To determine the relative efficacy of an intensive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) adjuvant chemotherapy regimen compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in node-positive breast cancer., Patients and Methods: Premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer were randomly allocated to receive either cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2 orally days 1 through 14; methotrexate 40 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) days 1 and 8; and fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 and 8 or cyclophosphomide 75 mg/m2 orally days 1 through 14; epirubicin 60 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 and 8; and fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 and 8. Each cycle was administered monthly for 6 months. Patients administered CEF received antibiotic prophylaxis with cotrimoxazole two tablets twice a day for the duration of chemotherapy., Results: The median follow-up was 59 months. One hundred sixty-nine of the 359 CMF patients developed recurrence compared with 132 of the 351 CEF patients. The corresponding 5-year relapse-free survival rates were 53% and 63%, respectively (P = .009). One hundred seven CMF patients died compared with 85 CEF patients. The corresponding 5-year actuarial survival rates were 70% and 77%, respectively (P = .03). The rate of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia was 1.1% in the CMF group compared with 8.5% in the CEF group. There was one case of congestive heart failure in a patient who received CMF compared with none in the CEF group. Acute leukemia occurred in five patients in the CEF group., Conclusion: The results of this trial show the superiority of CEF over CMF in terms of both disease-free and overall survival in premenopausal women with axillary node-positive breast cancer.

Purpose and Methods: By the mid 1980s, tamoxifen alone was considered standard adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with node-positive, estrogen receptor (ER)- or progesterone receptor (PgR)-positive breast cancer. From 1984 through 1990, 705 eligible postmenopausal women with node-positive, ER- or PgR-positive breast cancer were randomized to a National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) study that compared tamoxifen 30 mg by mouth daily for 2 years (TAM) versus TAM plus chemotherapy with all-intravenous cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2, methotrexate 40 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 given every 21 days for eight cycles (CMF)., Results: There were no significant differences in overall survival, recurrence-free survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, or distant recurrence-free survival between the two treatment arms. However, there was significantly greater severe toxicity, which included leukopenia (P < .0001), nausea and vomiting (P < .0001), and thromboembolic events (P < .0001), as well as significantly more mild or greater toxicity, which included thrombocytopenia (P = .04), anemia (P = .02), infection (P = .0004), mucositis (P = .0001), diarrhea (P = .0001), and neurologic toxicity (P = .006), in women who received TAM plus CMF., Conclusion: The addition of CMF to TAM adds no benefit and considerable toxicity in this group of women.

Purpose: The National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group (NCIC-CTG) conducted a phase II study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of docetaxel as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: Fifty-one patients with measurable MBC were studied. Three patients were ineligible and were excluded from analysis. The planned dose of docetaxel was 100 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks. Prior adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed if at least 12 months had elapsed from completion of treatment to recurrence., Results: The most severe toxicity was granulocytopenia. Ten patients (20.8%) were hospitalized for febrile neutropenia. The protocol was amended to a starting dose of 75 mg/m2 for the last 16 patients. Sixty percent of patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). After two protocol amendments, the use of a premedication regimen of oral dexamethasone and i.v. H1 and H2 blockers prevented significant HSRs. Edema developed in 62% of patients and was cumulative, was present in 50% who received greater than 400 mg/m2, and was not improved by premedication regimens. Following an independent radiology review, 22 partial remissions and four complete responses in 47 assessable patients were confirmed (response rate, 55%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 40% to 69%). The response rate for 15 assessable patients registered at 75 mg/m2 was 40% (95% CI, 16% to 67%); for 32 assessable patients registered at 100 mg/m2, the response rate was 63%, (95% CI, 43% to 78%)., Conclusion: Docetaxel is an active agent in MBC. Its activity as a single agent is comparable to many combination chemotherapy regimens and is not affected by prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Studies are ongoing to improve its therapeutic index and to incorporate docetaxel in combination chemotherapy regimens.

Purpose: The National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group conducted a phase II study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of edatrexate, a folate antagonist, in 35 patients with metastatic breast cancer., Patients and Methods: The planned dose of edatrexate was 80 mg/m2/wk administered intravenously as first-line therapy. Prior adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed provided at least 12 months had elapsed from the completion of treatment to the development of recurrence., Results: Mucositis was the dose-limiting toxicity in 34 assessable patients, resulting in a mean delivered dose-intensity of 57 mg/m2/wk. Other toxicities included myelosuppression, rash, pneumonitis, and increased AST. Side effects were generally mild to moderate. The complete plus partial remission rate (13 patients; 41%) was impressive., Conclusion: Edatrexate is an active agent against metastatic breast cancer, with acceptable toxicity. A lower than planned delivered dose-intensity was mainly due to mucositis.

One hundred eighty-seven patients with histologically proven advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to therapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) alone, to the Mallinson regimen (combined and sequential 5-FU, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, vincristine, and mitomycin C), or to combined 5-FU, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (FAP). Patients with both measurable and nonmeasurable disease were included and the primary study end point was survival. Among 41 patients with measurable disease, objective response rates were 7% for 5-FU alone, 21% for the Mallinson regimen, and 15% for FAP. The median interval to progression for each of the three regimens was 2.5 months. Survival curves intertwined with the median survival times for 5-FU alone and the Mallinson regimen at 4.5 months and for FAP at 3.5 months. Compared with 5-FU alone, both the Mallinson regimen and FAP produced significantly more toxicity. Neither the Mallinson regimen nor FAP can be recommended as therapy for advanced pancreatic carcinoma. Any chemotherapy for this disease should remain an experimental endeavor.