Whole brain radiotherapy after stereotactic radiosurgery or surgical resection among patients with one to three brain metastases and favorable prognoses: a secondary analysis of EORTC 22952-26001.

BACKGROUND: The absence of a survival benefit for whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) among randomized trials has been attributed to a competing risk of death from extracranial disease. We re-analyzed EORTC 22952 to assess the impact of WBRT on survival for patients with controlled extracranial disease or favorable prognoses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We utilized Cox regression, landmark analysis, and the Kaplan-Meier method to evaluate the impact of WBRT on survival accounting for (i) extracranial progression as a time-dependent covariate in all patients and (ii) diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment (GPA) score in patients with primary non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). RESULTS: A total of 329 patients treated per-protocol were included for analysis with a median follow up of 26 months. One hundred and fifteen (35%) patients had no extracranial progression; 70 (21%) patients had progression <90 days, 65 (20%) between 90 and 180 days, and 79 (24%) patients >180 days from randomization. There was no difference in the model-based risk of death in the WBRT group before [hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI)=0.70 (0.45-1.11), P = 0.133), or after [HR (95% CI)=1.20 (0.89-1.61), P = 0.214] extracranial progression. Among 177 patients with NSCLC, 175 had data available for GPA calculation. There was no significant survival benefit to WBRT among NSCLC patients with favorable GPA scores [HR (95% CI)=1.10 (0.68-1.79)] or unfavorable GPA scores [HR (95% CI)=1.11 (0.71-1.76)]. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with limited extracranial disease and one to three brain metastases at enrollment, we found no significant survival benefit to WBRT among NSCLC patients with favorable GPA scores or patients with any histology and controlled extracranial disease status. This exploratory analysis of phase III data supports the practice of omitting WBRT for patients with limited brain metastases undergoing SRS and close surveillance. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: NCT00002899.

The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to postoperative therapy in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer.

The current approach to the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer is sequential chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiation, and consolidation chemotherapy. Although significant tumor response is seen with this regimen, there are few studies that compare this approach to postoperative chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the disease-free and overall survival of patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery to patients treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Ninety-four patients with stage IIB, IIIA, and IIIB breast cancer were treated with a standardized chemotherapy regimen. The first group, 60 patients who were followed prospectively, was treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) consisting of vincristine, prednisone, cytoxan, methotrexate, and 5-FU (CVFMP) followed by surgery and consolidation chemotherapy with adriamycin. The second group, 34 patients evaluated retrospectively, had surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy (PCT) with CVFMP followed by adriamycin. Overall median follow-up was 38 months. In the NCT group, 45/60 (75%) patients had a clinical response to induction therapy and the median reduction in tumor size was 50%. The rates of local recurrence, distant recurrence, and death from disease were similar in the two groups. The time to local recurrence was similar for the two groups. However, the median time to distant recurrence was shorter in the NCT group (19 month vs. 31 months, p = NS). Overall median survival among the NCT patients was shorter than for the PCT group (30 vs. 47 months, p = NS). The current study suggests that postoperative therapy is comparable to a neoadjuvant regimen in patients with locally advanced breast cancer with regard to local recurrence, distant recurrence, and overall survival.

Ethnic differences in risk and prognostic factors for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Poor survival among African American patients with breast cancer has been attributed to low socioeconomic status and lack of access to health care. However, Hispanics of equivalent socioeconomic status and health care access exhibit much higher survival rates, almost comparable to whites. This suggests that biologic differences play a role in differences in breast cancer survival in addition to socioeconomic and health care access factors. METHODS: The authors studied clinical and molecular differences between patients with breast cancer of different ethnicity to determine biologic explanations for the observed differences in survival. Consecutive patients scheduled for breast biopsies were identified preoperatively and were interviewed. Blood was withdrawn for serum marker measurements, and tumor specimens collected at frozen section diagnosis were analyzed by flow cytometry, hormone receptor concentration, tumor grade, and Ki-67 nuclear antigen, HER-2/neu, and epidermal growth factor oncoprotein expression. RESULTS: Age, age at menarche, number of lymph nodes with metastasis, estrogen and progesterone receptor levels, ploidy status, S-phase, Ki-67, HER-2/neu expression, tumor grade, epidermal growth factor receptor expression, lipid-associated sialic acid (LASA), and carcinoembryonic antigen level were not significantly related to ethnicity. African Americans presented at a significantly more advanced stage and with significantly larger tumors. They were significantly heavier and had a significantly higher mean Quetelet's index and a significantly higher number of pregnancies and number of live births. Whites and Hispanics were significantly older at menopause. CONCLUSIONS: The molecular indices associated with breast cancer prognosis do not differ significantly among whites, African Americans, and Hispanics, suggesting that the reported differences in survival among these groups are not due to biologic differences in breast cancer among ethnic groups.