Back to Search Start Over

Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel Versus Epirubicin Plus Docetaxel Followed by Capecitabine As Adjuvant Therapy for Node-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Results From the GEICAM/2003-10 Study

Authors :
Noelia Martínez-Jañez
J. M. López-Vega
Encarna Adrover
Pedro Sánchez-Rovira
Maribel Casas
Juan de la Haba-Rodriguez
Sonia González
Eva Carrasco
Raquel Andrés
Manuel Ramos
Arrate Plazaola
Miguel Martin
Lourdes Calvo
Cesar Mendiola Fernandez
César A. Rodríguez
Álvaro Rodríguez-Lescure
Ana Isabel Ballesteros
Mireia Margeli Vila
Carlos Poblete Jara
Manuel Ruiz Borrego
Agustí Barnadas
Sonia Del Barco Berron
Montserrat Munoz-Mateu
MC Cámara
Nuria Ribelles
José Manuel Baena-Cañada
Amparo Ruiz Simón
Eduardo Martínez de Dueñas
Ana Santaballa
Ana Lluch
Source :
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, r-IIS La Fe. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, instname, r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau, r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica, r-FISABIO: Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica, Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)
Publication Year :
2015
Publisher :
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2015.

Abstract

Purpose Capecitabine is an active drug in metastatic breast cancer (BC). GEICAM/2003-10 is an adjuvant trial to investigate the integration of capecitabine into a regimen of epirubicin and docetaxel for node-positive early BC. Patients and Methods Patients with operable node-positive BC (T1-3/N1-3) were eligible. After surgery, 1,384 patients were randomly assigned to receive epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC; 90 and 600 mg/m2, respectively, × four cycles), followed by docetaxel (100 mg/m2 × four cycles; EC-T) or epirubicin plus docetaxel (ET; 90 and 75 mg/m2, respectively, × four cycles), followed by capecitabine (1,250 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1 to 14, × four cycles; ET-X); all regimens were given every 3 weeks. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival. Secondary end points included safety (with an alopecia-specific study) and overall survival (OS). Results After a median follow-up of 6.6 years and 297 events, 86% of patients who received EC-T and 82% of those who received ET-X were invasive disease free at 5 years (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.64; log-rank P = .03). The OS difference between arms was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.55; log-rank P = .46). The most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the EC-T versus ET-X arms were neutropenia (19% v 10%), with 7% febrile neutropenia across arms; fatigue (13% v 11%); diarrhea (3% v 11%); hand-foot syndrome (2% v 20%); mucositis (6% v 5%); vomiting (both, 5%); and myalgia (4.5% v 1%). Incomplete scalp hair recovery was more frequent in the EC-T than ET-X arm (30% v 14%), and patients who received EC-T wore wigs significantly longer than those who received ET-X (8.35 v 6.03 months). Conclusion Invasive disease-free survival, but not OS, was significantly superior for patients with node-positive early BC who received the adjuvant standard schedule EC-T than for those who received the experimental ET-X regimen. Toxicity profiles differed substantially across arms.

Details

ISSN :
15277755 and 0732183X
Volume :
33
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....c76095a711c6aa21768eec55a00794bf