Continuing chemotherapy or not after the induction treatment in advanced breast cancer patients. clinical outcomes and oncologists' preferences.

The optimal duration of cytostatic treatment for metastatic breast cancer is still a matter of debate. Possible gain in the duration of remission has to be weighed against the side-effects of treatment. Our aim was to define the optimal duration of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) treatment by studying the time to treatment failure, overall survival and using a Q-TWiST analysis. The treating physician's opinion was asked. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Breast Cancer Group conducted a randomised trial in 204 non-progressing metastatic breast cancer patients after induction chemotherapy (CMF) to stop or continue treatment. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were studied. To gain more insight into the burden of treatment-related side-effects, Q-TWiST was analysed. In addition, we asked for oncologists' preferences as patients are likely to be influenced by their physicians' opinion. Continuation of CMF had a significantly longer time to treatment failure (TTF) 5.2 versus 3.5 months (P=0.011). There was no overall survival (OS) difference 14.0 versus 14.4 months (P=0.77). Mean quality-adjusted survival time was equal to 8.4 months for no further treatment and decreased to 7.9 months for continuation of CMF (95% Confidence Interval (CI) of difference equals 0.5+/-2.5 months). Almost half of the oncologists said they would favour continuous treatment for a 3-month gain in time to progression-a difference which was not found in this study. Based on these data, an interruption of chemotherapy (CMF), if this is the wish of the patient, is justified.

A randomized phase II study of alternating and sequential regimens of docetaxel and doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of alternating and sequential regimens of docetaxel and doxorubicin as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with MBC requiring first-line chemotherapy for progressive disease (n = 106) were randomized and received 3-weekly monotherapy with docetaxel (T, 100 mg/m2, 1-h i.v. infusion) and doxorubicin (A, 75 mg/m2, 20-30-min i.v. infusion) either on a cycle-by-cycle alternating basis (ATATATAT, n = 51) or sequentially each for four cycles (TTTTAAAA, n = 55). RESULTS: For both regimens, the median number of cycles administered was the maximum of eight. The alternating and sequential groups achieved similar objective tumor response rates (60% and 67%, respectively) and similar median duration of response (47 and 44 weeks, respectively). With a median follow-up of 31 months, median survival times were estimated at 20 and 26 months in the alternating and sequential groups, respectively. No unexpected toxicities were reported. Compared with alternating therapy, patients receiving sequential therapy were more likely to complete the planned eight chemotherapy cycles (69% versus 63%), and had a lower incidence of febrile neutropenia (2% versus 14%). CONCLUSIONS: Alternating and sequential docetaxel-doxorubicin regimens are viable alternatives to simultaneous combination therapy in MBC, with sequential therapy achieving slightly higher response rates and improved tolerability compared with alternating therapy.

Treatment of operable breast cancer in the elderly: a randomised clinical trial EORTC 10851 comparing tamoxifen alone with modified radical mastectomy.

For treatment of early breast cancer in older women, little evidence is available from randomised trials. We conducted a randomised trial comparing modified radical mastectomy (MRM) with tamoxifen (TAM) as the sole initial therapy in 164 patients aged >/=70 years with operable breast cancer. 82 were treated by MRM and 82 with TAM. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method: multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox's proportional hazards model. Endpoints included survival, time to first relapse or progression, loco-regional progression, time to distant progression and progression-free survival. After a median follow-up of approximately 10 years, there was a significantly decreased time to progression in the TAM only group (logrank P<0.0001) and significantly shorter time to local progression within the TAM group (logrank P<0.0001). Overall survival of the two groups was similar. The results indicate that tamoxifen alone leads to an unacceptably high rate of local progression or relapse.

Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen in premenopausal metastatic breast cancer: a randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical or medical castration and antiestrogenic treatment with tamoxifen are common endocrine treatments for premenopausal women with breast cancer. However, tamoxifen therapy induces high levels of plasma estradiol, with unknown long-term effects. In this study, we investigated the effect of combining estrogen suppression with the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist buserelin and estradiol receptor blockade with tamoxifen to determine whether the high estradiol levels induced by tamoxifen could be reduced and whether the antitumor effects would be better. METHODS: In a three-arm, randomized, prospective trial, from 1988 through 1995, a total of 161 premenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer were randomly assigned to treatment with buserelin, tamoxifen, or both. Patients with steroid receptor-negative tumors or with tumors of unknown receptor status who had a disease-free interval of less than 2 years were excluded. The median follow-up was 7.3 years, during which 76% of the patients died, all of breast cancer. Patient and tumor characteristics were well balanced among treatment groups. All P values are from two-sided tests. RESULTS: Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen was superior to treatment with buserelin or tamoxifen alone by objective response rate (48%, 34%, and 28% of patients who could be evaluated, respectively; P =.11 [chi(2) test]), median progression-free survival (9.7 months, 6.3 months, and 5.6 months; P =.03), and overall survival (3.7 years, 2.5 years, and 2.9 years; P =.01). Actuarial 5-year survival percentages were 34.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 20.4%-48.0%), 14.9% (95% CI = 3.9%-25.9%), and 18.4% (95% CI = 7.0%-29.8%), respectively. No differences in antitumor effects were observed between single-agent treatment groups. During combined treatment or treatment with buserelin alone, plasma estradiol levels were suppressed equally; in contrast, during treatment with tamoxifen alone, plasma estradiol levels increased threefold to fourfold over pretreatment levels. CONCLUSION: Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen was more effective and resulted in longer overall survival than treatment with either drug alone.

Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival ¿PFS) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P =.003) for doxorubicin (response rate ¿RR, 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P <.001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P =.38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

Assessment of bone response to systemic therapy in an EORTC trial: preliminary experience with the use of collagen cross-link excretion. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer.

This study was designed to evaluate new bone resorption and tumour markers as possible alternatives to serial plain radiographs for the assessment of response to treatment. Thirty-seven patients with newly diagnosed bone metastases from breast cancer, randomized to receive oral pamidronate or placebo tablets in addition to anticancer treatment within the context of a multicentre EORTC trial, who were both assessable for radiographic response in bone and had serum and urine samples collected for more than 1 month were studied. The markers of bone metabolism measured included urinary calcium (uCa), hydroxyproline (hyp), the N-telopeptide cross-links of type I collagen (NTx) and total alkaline phosphatase. The tumour markers measured were CA15-3 and cancer-associated serum antigen (CASA). Before treatment, levels of Ntx, uCa and Hyp were elevated in 41%, 24% and 28% respectively, and CA15-3 and CASA increased in 69% and 50%. For assessment of response and identification of progression, Ntx was the most useful bone marker. All markers behaved similarly in no change (NC) and partial response (PR) patients. There was a significant difference (P < or = 0.05) in Ntx levels (compared to baseline) at 1 and 4 months and in CA15-3/CASA at 4 months between patients with PR or NC and those with progressive disease (PD), and at 4 months between those with time to progression (TP) > 7 and those with TP < or = 7 months. The diagnostic efficiency (DE) for prediction of PD following a > 50% increase in Ntx or CA15-3 was 78% and 62% respectively. An algorithm to predict response to therapy has been developed for future prospective evaluation.

Safety, activity and estrogen inhibition by exemestane in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: a phase I study.

Exemestane is an irreversible, steroidal, oral aromatase inhibitor under evaluation in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. A phase I study was conducted in 27 postmenopausal patients who were candidates for hormone therapy because they had advanced breast cancer and estrogen receptor-positive or unknown status. Most patients were moderately or heavily pretreated. Cohorts of at least three patients received sequentially escalating daily oral doses of 5-600 mg. The median duration of exemestane treatment was 13 weeks (range: 3-166 weeks). The maximal tolerated dose was not reached because of lack of treatment-related grade 3 or 4 toxicity. The most common adverse events, including those not related to treatment, were mild to moderate headache (44% of patients), dizziness (33%), nausea (33%), hot flushes (30%) and tumor-related pain (30%). There were three complete and four partial responses for an objective response rate of 26% (95% CI: 11.1-46.3%) in the intent-to-treat population; the median duration of response was 74 weeks (95% CI: 48-99 weeks). Exemestane, at the dose of 25 mg, maximally suppressed estradiol, estrone and estrone sulfate serum levels to 13, 5 and 10% of baseline, respectively. Exemestane appears to suppress estrogen, be well tolerated and have antitumor activity in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. A large, safe therapeutic window of up to 600 mg was defined. In view of its safety and estrogen-suppression profiles, the most favorable effects were observed at the 25 mg daily dose.

Docetaxel is a potent cytotoxic drug in the treatment of advanced breast cancer.

Docetaxel (Taxotere) belongs to a new class of anti-neoplastic agents, the taxanes. As the structurally related compound, paclitaxel, it enhances microtubule assembly and inhibits depolymerization of tubulin, thereby disrupting mitosis and cell replication. From august 1994 till december 1995, we treated thirty patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer in a protocol aiming at evaluating the efficacy of docetaxel, administered in second, third or fourth line chemotherapy. The drug was given at a dosage of 100 mg/m2, delivered as a 1-hour infusion once every 3 weeks. Among the 30 patients, 9 (30%) showed an objective response (PR) and 15 (50%) had disease stabilization. For those 2 groups, the median time to progression was 20 weeks (range 13-61) and 13.5 weeks (range 10-37) respectively; the median survival for the whole group was 22.5 weeks (range 1-72). Myelosuppression (neutropenia) was the dose-limiting toxicity. We conclude that docetaxel is a potent single agent in heavily pretreated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, even in those who are resistant to an anthracycline or an anthracenedione.

Doxorubicin vs epirubicin, report of a second-line randomized phase II/III study in advanced breast cancer. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group.

The EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group carried out a randomized trial to compare doxorubicin with epirubicin as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Two hundred and fifty-nine patients with at least one site of metastatic disease entered this trial, of whom 232 patients were eligible. Treatment consisted of doxorubicin 75 mg m(-2) or epirubicin 90 mg m(-2) i.v. every 3 weeks. The overall response rates for doxorubicin and epirubicin were 36% and 28% respectively (P = 0.173). The median time to progression was 23 weeks for doxorubicin and 19 weeks for epirubicin (P = 0.063) and the median duration of response was 40 weeks for doxorubicin and 32 weeks for epirubicin (P = 0.059). The median survival was 47 weeks for doxorubicin and 44 weeks for epirubicin (P = 0.196). Leucocyte count on retreatment day (P = 0.011) and platelet nadir (P = 0.031) were significantly lower in the doxorubicin-treated group. Also mucositis (P < 0.001), diarrhoea (P = 0.005) and haemorrhage (P = 0.048) were significantly worse in the doxorubicin arm. Nine patients on doxorubicin and two patients on epirubicin experienced congestive heart failure (CHF). At the dose levels used in this study, no statistical differences in response rate and survival were found between the two treatment arms. Treatment with doxorubicin tended to result in a slightly longer duration of response and time to progression but doxorubicin was more toxic than epirubicin.

Phase II study on mitoxantrone in adenoid cystic carcinomas of the head and neck. EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group.

BACKGROUND: Based on activity in a case report, mitoxantrone was studied in a phase II study in adenoid cystic carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with symptomatic and/or rapidly progressive metastatic or recurrent adenoid cystic carcinoma were eligible for this study. They were treated with mitoxantrone given intravenously by bolus injection at a dose of 14 mg/m2, cycles repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Thirty-six chemotherapy-naive patients entered on trial, 4 were ineligible. A median of 6 cycles per patient were given. Leucocytopenia (in 97% of patients) was the most important side effect and tended to be cumulative. Other side effects were mainly mild to moderate and consisted of nausea (62%), vomiting (29%), alopecia (53%) and mucositis (41%). Four of 32 patients had a partial response (12%; 95% CI 4%-29%) lasting 3-13 months, 22 patients (69%) had a stable disease. CONCLUSION: Mitoxantrone at this dose and schedule has modest activity in adenoid cystic carcinomas.

An EORTC pilot study of filgrastim (recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor) as support to a high dose-intensive epiadriamycin-cyclophosphamide regimen in chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to increase chemotherapy dose intensity by step-wise reduction of the time interval between treatment cycles, filgrastim was administered to breast cancer patients receiving a three-month combination chemotherapy with epirubicin (E) and cyclophosphamide (C). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer received fixed doses of E (120 mg/m2) and C 9830 mg/m2) by 15-min i.v. infusion on day 1 of each cycle and filgrastim at a dose of 4 micrograms/kg once daily by SC injection starting 24 hours after chemotherapy. Cohorts of patients were treated in successive schedules, each schedule corresponding to a specified time interval between chemotherapy cycles. The toxicity observed in each schedule was evaluated before patients were accrued to the next schedule, which corresponded to a shorter time interval between chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated schedule was E (120 mg/m2) plus C 9830 mg/m2) given every 14 days with filgrastim support from day 2 until day 13. On this schedule, 5 of 12 patients experienced dose-intensity-limiting toxicities (DLT) during the 3-month study period. Non-hematological DLT occurred in 2/12 patients (mucositis, skin toxicity) while /312 experienced febrile neutropenia requiring i.v. antibiotics. All patients achieved recovery of ANC to >1.5 x 10(9)/l by the time of scheduled retreatment. The combination of filgrastim with this regimen did not seem to add major toxicities. The efficacy was high, with 87% of patients achieving an objective response and a median response duration of 18 months (range: 4-52 months). CONCLUSIONS: Filgrastim permits at 33% increase in 'EC' dose intensification over that of the conventional every-3-week administration. Randomized studies should now be initiated to evaluate the merit, if any, of 'accelerated' chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer.

Randomized phase III trial of edatrexate versus methotrexate in patients with metastatic and/or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group study.

PURPOSE: To compared the response rates and the toxicity of the new antifolate edatrexate (EDX) with that of methotrexate (MTX) in a randomized trial in patients with metastatic or recurrent squamous cell cancer of the head and neck (SCC) and to compare the durations of response and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred seventy-three patients with SCC were randomized to receive either EDX or MTX as a weekly intravenous (IV) bolus injection. Doses of EDX were initially 80 mg/m2/wk, but because of the toxicity, this was later reduced to 70 mg/m2/wk. MTX was administered at a dose of 40 mg/m2/wk throughout. In both arms, two dose increments of 10% were scheduled in case of no toxicity. RESULTS: Of 264 eligible patients, 131 were treated with EDX and 133 with MTX. There were five treatment-related deaths: four on EDX and one on MTX. Overall, toxicity was similar in both arms; however, stomatitis, skin toxicity, and hair loss were more pronounced on the EDX arm. The overall response rate was 21% (six complete responses [CRs] and 21 partial responses [PRs]) for EDX and 16% (nine CRs and 12 PRs) for MTX (P = .392). Responses were mainly seen in patients with locoregional disease. Tumors that originated from the hypopharynx responded poorly in comparison to tumors from other sites. The median duration of response was 6.1 months for EDX and 6.4 months for MTX (log-rank P = .262). There was no difference in overall or progression-free survival. The median survival duration was 6 months on both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both EDX and MTX are moderately active against SCC. In this large phase III study, response rates, time to treatment failure, and overall survival appeared to be similar for both antifolates. However, EDX had more side effects than MTX and therefore cannot be recommended for routine palliative treatment of patients with SCC.

Randomized comparison of cisplatin, methotrexate, bleomycin and vincristine (CABO) versus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) versus cisplatin (C) in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. A phase III study of the EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group.

BACKGROUND: The EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group conducted a randomized comparison of cisplatin, methotrexate, bleomycin and vincristine (CABO) versus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) versus cisplatin (C) in chemotherapy naive patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. The primary objectives of this study were to investigate whether the CF regimen was in anyway superior to the CABO regimen and to detect any superiority of these two combinations over cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred eighty-two patients were randomized to one of three treatments: (1) methotrexate (40 mg/m2) days 1 and 15, bleomycin (10 mg) and vincristine (2 mg) days 1, 8 and 15, cisplatin (50 mg/m2) day 4, repeated every 21 days, (2) cisplatin (100 mg/m2) and 5-FU (1 g/m2 x 4), repeated every 21 days, and (3) cisplatin (50 mg/m2) days 1 and 8, repeated every 28 days. After 3 cycles, all responding and stable disease patients in the three arms of the study continued with cisplatin alone. RESULTS: The overall response rates to CABO (34%) and CF (31%) were superior to C (15%) (p < 0.001, p = 0.003, respectively). In addition, complete response rate to CABO (9.5%) was superior to that of C (2.5%) (p = 0.02), and also superior to that of CF (1.7%) (p = 0.01). Response was associated with performance status and prior treatment, but by multivariate analysis treatment type was the important determinant of response (p = 0.0006). Although CABO and CF were superior to C with respect to time to progression within the first 6 to 8 months after randomization, there was no overall difference in progression-free survival or survival between the three arms of the study. Both hematologic and non-hematologic toxicity were worse in the combination chemotherapy arms. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the CF regimen has no advantage over the CABO regimen, which in fact showed a higher complete response rate. Both combinations showed improved response rates but also more toxicity and no improvement in overall survival in comparison with cisplatin alone.

A phase II trial of 10-ethyl-10-deaza-aminopterin, a novel antifolate, in patients with advanced and/or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. The EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group.

Forty-seven patients with advanced and/or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were treated with 10-ethyl-10-deaza-aminopterin (10-EdAM), a new analogue of methotrexate. The drug was given as a weekly i.v. bolus injection, starting at 80 mg/m2 with two dose increments of 10% if no toxicity was observed after two weeks. Only patients with tumors of the larynx, oral cavity, oropharynx and hypopharynx were included in the trial. Eighty-two percent of the patients had had prior surgery and/or radiotherapy. Forty-four patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Five CR (12%) and five PR were obtained, yielding a response rate of 24% (CR+PR). The toxicity was similar to that usually seen with methotrexate; stomatitis and skin toxicity were rather pronounced. The data suggest that 10-EdAM has activity similar to that of methotrexate in patients with head and neck cancer.

"Classical" CMF versus a 3-weekly intravenous CMF schedule in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. An EORTC Breast Cancer Co-operative Group Phase III Trial (10808).

The "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil) schedule was compared with a modified 3-weekly intravenous CMF schedule in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer, as concern had arisen as to whether the classical schedule was the optimal way to give these drugs. The response rate with classical CMF was 48% compared with 29% for intravenous CMF (P = 0.003). Response duration was similar at 11 months, but survival longer for the classical schedule (17 versus 12 months, P = 0.016). We conclude that classical CMF is the superior regimen and attribute this to the higher dose intensity achieved.

Second line endocrine treatment of postmenopausal advanced breast cancer. Preliminary endocrine results of a 5-arm randomized phase II trial of medium vs low dose aminoglutethimide, with or without hydrocortisone vs hydrocortisone alone (EORTC 10861).

The supposed mechanism of action of aminoglutethimide (AG), medical adrenalectomy, has been challenged. AG is now considered to act as an inhibitor of the aromatization of mainly adrenal androgens to estrogens in peripheral tissues and/or breast cancer itself. To further establish the AG dose required to sufficiently reduce estrogen levels in plasma and the possible role of hydrocortisone (HC) in combination with AG or by itself, postmenopausal advanced breast cancer patients received AG low (125 mg bid) or medium (250 mg bid) dose alone or combined with HC (20 mg bid) or HC alone (20 mg bid). Preliminary hormonal data show a similar reduction of serum estrone and estrone sulphate by at least some 50% at 8 wk in all treatment groups. At 6 months these effects persist except for patients treated with HC alone. In the latter a normalization of estrone levels is observed with effective suppression of adrenal androgen precursors, suggesting increased aromatase activity with prolonged glucocorticoid treatment.

Locally advanced breast cancer: the contribution of cytotoxic and endocrine treatment to radiotherapy. An EORTC Breast Cancer Co-operative Group Trial (10792).

Patients with locally advanced carcinoma of the breast were randomized to receive either radiotherapy alone, radiotherapy + endocrine therapy, radiotherapy + chemotherapy or radiotherapy + endocrine therapy + chemotherapy. In 363 evaluable patients, time to first progression was delayed significantly by both endocrine treatment and chemotherapy, the greatest effect being achieved by the combination of endocrine treatment and chemotherapy. This effect was almost entirely due to a major effect of systemic treatment on time to loco-regional progression, for which the result is highly significant, rather than time to distant metastasis in which only a non-significant trend was observed. For survival, a trend was seen in favour of the combination of hormone treatment and chemotherapy, but this effect did not achieve statistical significance. This trial suggests that current endocrine and cytotoxic treatments are only of marginal value in improving the prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer.