Would shared decision-making be useful in breast cancer screening programmes? A qualitative study using focus group discussions to gather evidence from French women with different socioeconomic backgrounds.

BACKGROUND: To inform the development of an online tool to be potentially used in shared decision-making about breast cancer screening, French women were questioned about participation in breast cancer screening, the health professional's role, and their perceptions of the proposed tool. METHODS: We organised focus group discussions with 55 French women. Two different strategies were used to recruit women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds. We applied both inductive and deductive approaches to conduct a thematic analysis of the discussions. We analysed the responses by using the main determinants from different health behaviour models and compared the two groups. RESULTS: Independently of socioeconomic status, the most important determinant for a woman's participation in breast cancer screening was the perceived severity of breast cancer and the perceived benefits of its early detection by screening. Cues to action reported by both groups were invitation letters; recommendations by health professionals, or group/community activities and public events were reported by women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds, respectively. Among other positive determinants, women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported making informed decisions and receiving peer support whereas women from low socioeconomic backgrounds reported community empowerment through group/community events. Fear of cancer was reported as a barrier in both groups. Among other barriers, language issues were reported only by women from low socioeconomic backgrounds; women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported breast cancer screening-related risks other than overdiagnosis and/or overtreatment. Barriers to accessing the online tool to be developed were mainly reported by women from high socioeconomic backgrounds. CONCLUSION: Limitations in implementing shared decision-making for women from low socioeconomic backgrounds were highlighted. An online tool that is suitable for all women, regardless of socioeconomic status, would provide "on-demand" reliable and tailored information about breast cancer screening and improve access to health professionals and social exchanges.

Role of mammography accessibility, deprivation and spatial effect in breast cancer screening participation in France: an observational ecological study.

BACKGROUND: The detection of cancer in its early latent stages can improve patients' chances of recovery and thereby reduce the overall burden of the disease. Our objectives were to investigate factors (geographic accessibility and deprivation level) affecting mammography screening participation variation and to determine how much geographic variation in participation rates can be explained by spillover effects between adjacent areas, while controlling for covariates. METHODS: Mammography screening participation rates between 2015 and 2016 were calculated by census blocks (CB), for women aged 50-74 years, residing in Lyon metropolitan area. Global spatial autocorrelation tests were applied to identify the geographic variation of participation. Spatial regression models were used to incorporate spatial structure to estimate associations between mammography participation rate and the combined effect (geographic accessibility and deprivation level) adjusting for modes of travel and social cohesion. RESULTS: The mammography participation rate was found to have a statistically significant and positive spatial correlation. The participation rate of one CB was significantly and positively associated with the participation rates of neighbouring CB. The participation was 53.2% in residential and rural areas and 46.6% in urban areas, p < 0.001. Using Spatial Lag models, whereas the population living in most deprived CBs have statistically significantly lower mammography participation rates than lower deprived ones, significant interaction demonstrates that the relation differs according to the degree of urbanization. CONCLUSIONS: This study makes an important methodological contribution in measuring geographical access and understanding better the combined effect of deprivation and the degree of urbanization on mammography participation and other contextual factors that affect the decision of using mammography screening services -which is a critical component of healthcare planning and equity.

Mapping Variation in Breast Cancer Screening: Where to Intervene?

Small geographic areas with lower mammography screening participation rates may reflect gaps in screening efforts. Our objective was to use spatial analyses to understand disparities in mammography screening use and to identify factors to increase its uptake in areas that need it in Lyon metropolitan area, France. Data for screened women between the ages of 50 and 74 were analyzed. Census blocks of screened and non screened women were extracted from the mammography screening programme 2015-2016 dataset. We used spatial regression models, within a generalized additive framework to determine clusters of census blocks with significantly higher prevalence of non-participation of mammography screening. Smoothed risk maps were crude and adjusted on the following covariates: deprivation index and opportunistic screening. Among 178,002 women aged 50 to 74, 49.9% received mammography screening. As hypothesized, women living in highly deprived census blocks had lower participation rates compared to less deprived blocks, 45.2% vs. 51.4% p < 0.001. Spatial analyses identified four clusters, one located in an urban area and three in suburban areas. Moreover, depending on the location of the cluster, the influence came from different variables. Knowing the impact of site-specific risk factors seems to be important for implementing an appropriate prevention intervention.

A motivational phone call improves participation to screening colonoscopy for those with a positive FIT in a national screening programme (NCT 03276091).

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of individuals with a positive faecal immunologic test (FIT) will never undergo the recommended colonoscopy despite a full sequence of reminders. AIMS: This prospective study aimed to recruit refractory individuals by a motivational personalised phone call given by a screening physician. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of a motivational phone call given by a physician of the screening organisation in order to convince patients with positive FIT to undergo a colonoscopy. RESULTS: 115 individuals with a positive FIT were targeted. After GP phone call, it was ascertained that 15 had had a colonoscopy, one died, one moved outside the region, and the GP refused the study phone call for 13. Finally, we attempted to call 85 individuals; 24 could not be reached, 5 colonoscopies had been performed, and thus 56 individuals were included. The main reason for colonoscopy refusal (33.9%) was wrong advice from the GP or the gastroenterologist. Among those included, 33.9% (19/56) underwent the colonoscopy within 22.7 months after FIT; 1 invasive cancer, 18 adenomas and 9 serrated sessile lesions were found. CONCLUSION: Motivational phone call performed by a physician from the screening organisation is effective to recruit a third of refractory individuals. Education for GPs and gastroenterologists is necessary to increase participation to colonoscopy and to avoid the performance of an inappropriate secondary FIT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT 03276091.

In Situ Investigation of the Iron Carbide Precipitation Process in a Fe-C-Mn-Si Q&P Steel.

Quenching and Partitioning (Q&P) steels are promising candidates for automotive applications because of their lightweight potential. Their properties depend on carbon enrichment in austenite which, in turn, is strongly influenced by carbide precipitation in martensite during quenching and partitioning treatment. In this paper, by coupling in situ High Energy X-Ray Diffraction (HEXRD) experiments and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), we give some clarification regarding the precipitation process of iron carbides in martensite throughout the Q&P process. For the first time, precipitation kinetics was followed in real time. It was shown that precipitation starts during the reheating sequence for the steel studied. Surprisingly, the precipitated fraction remains stable all along the partitioning step at 400 °C. Furthermore, the analyses enable the conclusion that the iron carbides are most probably eta carbides. The presence of cementite was ruled out, while the presence of several epsilon carbides cannot be strictly excluded.

Colon capsule versus computed tomography colonography for colorectal cancer screening in patients with positive fecal occult blood test who refuse colonoscopy: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Some patients (10 % - 32 %) with a positive guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) do not undergo the recommended colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and computed tomography colonography (CTC) in terms of participation rate and detection outcomes when offered to patients with a positive gFOBT who did not undergo the recommended colonoscopy. METHODS: An invitation letter offering CTC or VCE was sent to selected patients after randomization. Acceptance of the proposed (or alternative) procedure and procedure results were recorded. Sample size was evaluated according to the hypothesis of a 13 % increase of participation with VCE. RESULTS: A total of 756 patients were targeted. Following the invitation letter, 5.0 % (19/378) of patients underwent the proposed VCE and 7.4 % (28/378) underwent CTC, (P = 0.18). Following the letter, 9.8 % (37/378) of patients in the VCE group underwent a diagnostic procedure (19 VCE, 1 CTC, 17 colonoscopy) vs. 10.8 % in the CTC group (41/378: 28 CTC, 13 colonoscopy; P = 0.55). There were more potentially neoplastic lesions diagnosed in the VCE group than in the CTC group (12/20 [60.0 %] vs. 8/28 [28.6 %]; P = 0.04). Thus, 15/20 noninvasive procedures in the VCE group (19 VCE, 1 CTC; 75.0 %) vs. 10/28 in the CTC group (35.7 %; P = 0.01) resulted in a recommendation of further colonoscopy, but only 10/25 patients actually underwent this proposed colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Patients with a positive gFOBT result who do not undergo the recommended colonoscopy are difficult to recruit to the screening program and simply proposing an additional, less-invasive procedure, such as VCE or CTC, is not an effective strategy.ClinicalTrials.govNCT02558881TRIAL REGISTRATION: Randomized, controlled trial NCT02558881 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Decision aid on breast cancer screening reduces attendance rate: results of a large-scale, randomized, controlled study by the DECIDEO group.

Controversies regarding the benefits of breast cancer screening programs have led to the promotion of new strategies taking into account individual preferences, such as decision aid. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a decision aid leaflet on the participation of women invited to participate in a national breast cancer screening program. This Randomized, multicentre, controlled trial. Women aged 50 to 74 years, were randomly assigned to receive either a decision aid or the usual invitation letter. Primary outcome was the participation rate 12 months after the invitation. 16 000 women were randomized and 15 844 included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The participation rate in the intervention group was 40.25% (3174/7885 women) compared with 42.13% (3353/7959) in the control group (p = 0.02). Previous attendance for screening (RR = 6.24; [95%IC: 5.75-6.77]; p < 0.0001) and medium household income (RR = 1.05; [95%IC: 1.01-1.09]; p = 0.0074) were independently associated with attendance for screening. This large-scale study demonstrates that the decision aid reduced the participation rate. The decision aid activate the decision making process of women toward non-attendance to screening. These results show the importance of promoting informed patient choices, especially when those choices cannot be anticipated.

[Breast cancer screening in thirteen French departments]. / Dépistage du cancer du sein dans treize départements français.

BACKGROUND: In France, breast cancer screening programme, free of charge for women aged 50-74 years old, coexists with an opportunistic screening and leads to reduction in attendance in the programme. Here, we reported participation in organized and/or opportunistic screening in thirteen French departments. POPULATION AND METHODS: We analyzed screening data (organized and/or opportunistic) of 622,382 women aged 51-74 years old invited to perform an organized mammography screening session from 2010 to 2011 in the thirteen French departments. The type of mammography screening performed has been reported according to women age, their health insurance scheme, the rurality and the socioeconomic level of their area or residence. We also represented the tertiles of deprivation and participation in mammography screening for each department. RESULTS: A total of 390,831 (62.8%) women performed a mammography screening (organized and/or opportunistic) after the invitation. These women were mainly aged from 55-69 years old, insured by the general insurance scheme and lived in urban, semi-urban or affluent areas. CONCLUSION: The participation in mammography screening (organized and opportunistic) in France remains below the target rate of 70% expected by health authorities to reduce breast cancer mortality through screening.

Modelling the effect of breast cancer screening on related mortality using French data.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed at modelling the effect of organized breast cancer screening on mortality in France. It combined results from a Markov model for breast cancer progression, to predict number of cases by node status, and from relative survival analyses, to predict deaths. The method estimated the relative risk of mortality at 8 years, in women aged 50-69, between a population screened every two years and a reference population. METHODS: Analyses concerned cases diagnosed between 1990 and 1996, with a follow-up up to 2004 for the vital status. Markov models analysed data from 3 screening programs (300,000 mammographies) and took into account opportunistic screening among participants to avoid bias in parameter's estimates. We used survival data from cancers in the general population (n=918, 7 cancer registries) and from screened cancers (n=565, 3 cancer registries), after excluding a subgroup of screened cases with a particularly high survival. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Markov model main analysis lacked of fit in two out of three districts. Fit was improved in stratified analyses by age or district, though some lack of fit persisted in two districts. Assuming 10% or 20% overdiagnosed screened cancers, mortality reduction was estimated as 23% (95% CI: 4, 38%) and 19% (CI: -3, 35%) respectively. Results were highly sensitive to the exclusion in the screened cancers survival analysis. Conversely, RR estimates varied moderately according to the Markov model parameters used (stratified by age or district). CONCLUSION: The study aimed at estimating the effect of screening in a screened population compared to an unscreened control group. Such a control group does not exist in France, and we used a general population contaminated by opportunistic screening to provide a conservative estimate. Conservative choices were systematically adopted to avoid favourable estimates. A selection bias might however affect the estimates, though it should be moderate because extreme social classes are under-represented among participants. This modelling provided broad estimates for the effect of organized biennial screening in France in the early nineteen-nineties. Results will be strengthened with longer follow-up.

Multi-state Markov models in cancer screening evaluation: a brief review and case study.

This work presents a brief overview of Markov models in cancer screening evaluation and focuses on two specific models. A three-state model was first proposed to estimate jointly the sensitivity of the screening procedure and the average duration in the preclinical phase, i.e. the period when the cancer is asymptomatic but detectable by screening. A five-state model, incorporating lymph node involvement as a prognostic factor, was later proposed combined with a survival analysis to predict the mortality reduction associated with screening. The strengths and limitations of these two models are illustrated using data from French breast cancer service screening programmes. The three-state model is a useful frame but parameter estimates should be interpreted with caution. They are highly correlated and depend heavily on the parametric assumptions of the model. Our results pointed out a serious limitation to the five-state model, due to implicit assumptions which are not always verified. Although it may still be useful, there is a need for more flexible models. Over-diagnosis is an important issue for both models and induces bias in parameter estimates. It can be addressed by adding a non-progressive state, but this may provide an uncertain estimation of over-diagnosis. When the primary goal is to avoid bias, rather than to estimate over-diagnosis, it may be more appropriate to correct for over-diagnosis assuming different levels in a sensitivity analysis. This would be particularly relevant in a perspective of mortality reduction estimation.

[Reattendance of women for breast cancer screening programs. A review]. / Participation secondaire des femmes au dépistage organisé du cancer du sein Revue de la littérature.

BACKGROUND: In France, breast cancer is the most frequently occurring cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Breast cancer screening has been shown to reduce breast cancer mortality by 30% provided attendance rate is 70% and re-screening interval is two to three years. Maintaining a high rate of reattendance is also important. The decline with time of completion rates of re-screening will lessen the benefits of a breast cancer screening program. METHODS: A review of published studies examining factors associated with attendance and reattendance to breast cancer screening. RESULTS: Positive views about initial screening are determining factors in reattendance: mammography should not be painful and embarrassing, appointments should be punctual and clinic staff courteous and supportive. Psychological factors influencing attendance also influence reattendance as does intention to participate, a major predictor of repeat participation and as do perceived susceptibility of breast cancer, perceived benefits of mammography, absence of emotional barriers. These factors can be modified by experience of previous screening. Other predicting factors of attendance continue to influence reattendance: practice of other preventive health behaviors, outside support from physicians, knowledge of breast cancer and screening. CONCLUSION: A better understanding of factors influencing attendance is necessary to increase the impact of breast cancer screening. Field studies are necessary to support the elaboration of publicity campaigns aimed at increasing participation.

A phase I/II study of 4 monthly courses of high-dose cyclophosphamide and thiotepa for metastatic breast cancer patients.

This pilot phase I/II study intended to determine the maximum tolerated dose of cyclophosphamide and thiotepa administered on four consecutive courses with peripheral blood progenitor cell and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support, as first-line therapy for hormone-refractory metastatic breast cancer patients. Twenty-eight patients were entered in the study. After two courses of epirubicin (120 mg m(-2)) and cyclophosphamide (2 g m(-2)) followed by granulocyte-colony stimulating factor injection and leukaphereses, patients received four cycles of cyclophosphamide and thiotepa. Each cycle was followed by peripheral blood progenitor cell and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor supports, then repeated every 28 to 35 days. Six escalating dose levels of cyclophosphamide and thiotepa were planned, beginning at cyclophosphamide 1.5 g m(-2) and thiotepa 200 mg m(-2). At least three patients were enrolled for each dose level. Eighteen patients completed the study. The maximum tolerated dose was 3000 mg m(-2) cyclophosphamide and 400 mg m(-2) thiotepa per course. Haematological toxicity was manageable on an outpatient basis and did not increase significantly with dose escalation. Dose-limiting toxicity was chemotherapy-induced immunosuppression, which resulted in one toxic death and two life-threatening infections. Median times to treatment failure and survival were 11 and 26 months, respectively. Three patients were alive, free of disease 30 months after completion of the study. Such therapy allows for high-dose intensity and high cumulative doses on a short period of time with manageable toxicity.

Results of a phase III prospective, randomised trial, comparing mitoxantrone and vinorelbine (MV) in combination with standard FAC/FEC in front-line therapy of metastatic breast cancer.

This comparative phase III trial of mitoxantrone+vinorelbine (MV) versus 5-fluorouracil+cyclophosphamide+either doxorubicin or epirubicin (FAC/FEC) in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer was conducted to determine whether MV would produce equivalent efficacy, while resulting in an improved tolerance in relation to alopecia and nausea/vomiting. This multicentre study recruited and randomised 281 patients with metastatic breast cancer; 280 were evaluable for response survival and toxicity (138 received FAC/FEC, 142 received MV). Patient characteristics were matched in each arm and stratification for prior exposure to adjuvant therapy was made prospectively. The overall response rate (ORR) was equivalent in the two arms (33.3% for FAC/FEC versus 34.5% for MV), but MV was more effective in patients who had received prior adjuvant therapy (13% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3-23) for FAC/FEC versus 33% (95% CI 20-47) for MV P=0.025) with a better progression-free survival (PFS) (5 months (range 1-18 months) versus 8 months (range 1-27 months); P=0.0007 for FAC/FEC versus MV, respectively) while FAC/FEC was more effective in previously untreated patients (ORR 43% (95% CI 33-53) versus 35% (95% CI 25-45), P=0.26; PFS 9 months (range 0-29 months) versus 6 months (range 0-26 months) P=0.014). Toxicity was monitored through the initial six cycles of therapy; febrile neutropenia and delayed haematological recovery was more frequent for MV (P=0.001), while nausea/vomiting of grades 3-4 was greater for FAC/FEC (P=0.031), as was alopecia (P=0.0001), cardiotoxicity was the same for the two regimens. MV represents a chemotherapy combination with equivalent efficacy to standard FAC/FEC and improved results for patients who have previously received adjuvant chemotherapy. Toxicity must be balanced to allow for increased haematological suppression and risk of febrile neutropenia with MV compared with a higher risk of subjectively unpleasant side-effects such as nausea/vomiting and alopecia with FAC/FEC.

Dose-escalation study of single dose mitoxantrone in combination with timed sequential chemotherapy in patients with refractory or relapsing acute myelogenous leukemia.

A dose-escalation study was realized in order to assess the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of high-dose mitoxantrone in a single injection combined with cytarabine and etoposide (EMA regimen) in refractory or relapsed acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Between July 1997 and June 1998, 24 patients with relapsed or refractory AML entered the study. All but one patient had normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline. Performance status according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria was less than two in all cases. All patients have been previously treated by mitoxantrone or anthracyclines. Four cohort of ten patients were scheduled with the following doses: (1) mitoxantrone 36 mg/m2 on day 1; (2) mitoxantrone 45 mg/m2 on day 1; (3) mitoxantrone 60 mg/m2 on day 1; (4) mitoxantrone 75 mg/m2 on day 1 in combination with cytarabine 500 mg/m2 per day (days 1-3, and days 8-10), and etoposide 200 mg/m2 per day (days 8-10). All patients received the full doses of the three drugs. The limiting toxicity was defined as WHO grade 4 nonhematologic toxicity and for impairment of cardiac function by Alexander's criteria (moderate or severe toxicity). The occurrence of limiting toxicity in at least three patients from the same dose level determined the MDT. No limiting toxicity was observed in mitoxantrone dose level 1. Two limiting toxicities were observed in mitoxantrone dose level 2 (one mucositis, one moderate cardiac toxicity), and three limiting toxicities in mitoxantrone dose level 3 (1 high transaminase levels, two moderate cardiac toxicities) ending the assay. Overall, 16 patients (67%) achieved complete remission (CR). One drug-addict patient died from cerebral hemorrhage due to severe aspergillosis and was not considered as a limiting toxicity. After EMA chemotherapy, 13 patients received subsequent chemotherapy courses involving anthracyclines or their derivatives. Six patients underwent allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. No late toxicity occurred. The median survival of the entire cohort was 41.4 weeks. We conclude that (i) EMA chemotherapy using a single injection of mitoxantrone is effective in the treatment of refractory or relapsing AML; (ii) the recommended phase II dose of mitoxantrone is 45 mg/m2 administered over 30 min as a single dose in combination with cytarabine and etoposide.

High-dose methotrexate and HELP [Holoxan (ifosfamide), eldesine (vindesine), platinum]--doxorubicin in non-metastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity: a French multicentre pilot study. Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte contre le Cancer and Société Française d'Oncologie Pédiatrique.

UNLABELLED: This study evaluates histological response, long-term outcome, and toxicity in an intensive chemotherapy program given before surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients (39 males, 23 females: median age 14) with biopsy, chest computerised-tomography, technetium bone-scan and magnetic resonance imaging, were enrolled. Primary localisations were femur (44%) and tibia (26%). Induction chemotherapy involved seven courses of high-dose methotrexate and two courses of HELP (ifosfamide, eldesine (vindesine), cisplatin (platinum)-doxorubicin. After surgery, patients received six courses of high-dose methotrexate and two courses of HELP-doxorubicin. RESULTS: Pre- and postoperative toxicities were similar. Fifty-nine patients underwent surgery; histological response was good in thirty-eight patients (64%) and poor in twenty-one (36%). Median follow-up is 57 months (range 30-80), with 77% overall survival and 59% progression-free survival. In a multivariate analysis, age under 10 years is the only prognostic factor that significantly correlates with outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen appears to increase histological necrosis, but associates with severe toxicity. Results for patients with less necrosis at surgery are encouraging. Future trials should determine the minimum effective doses to reduce toxicity. New drugs should be added.

Cefepime versus imipenem-cilastatin as empirical monotherapy in 400 febrile patients with short duration neutropenia. CEMIC (Study Group of Infectious Diseases in Cancer).

This open, comparative, randomized, multicentre equivalence study compared cefepime 2 g bd and imipenem-cilastatin 1 g tds (50 mg/kg/day) as empirical monotherapy for febrile episodes in a homogeneous cohort of cancer patients with short duration neutropenia following chemotherapy for solid tumour, lymphoma or myeloma. The study was conducted in 17 French anti-cancer centres in 1995 and 1996. Response to monotherapy was assessed 7 days after treatment and was based on resolution of fever and signs and symptoms, eradication of pathogens, absence of new infection, relapse, and death of infectious origin, without addition of other antibiotics. Patients were treated for a minimum of 4 days. Of the 400 episodes randomized, 344 (86%) were evaluable for efficacy. Patient characteristics were comparable between treatment groups. Success of monotherapy was observed in 79% of episodes with cefepime and 72% with imipenem-cilastatin (equivalence, P <0.0001). The response rate for microbiologically documented infections was 66% with cefepime and 61% with imipenem-cilastatin (bacteraemic episodes: 63% for cefepime; 44% for imipenem-cilastatin). A second antibiotic (usually a glycopeptide) was added in 20% and 21% of the cases, respectively. Overall, the response to therapy, with or without an additional antibiotic, was 95% (cefepime) and 90% (imipenem-cilastatin). Survival was similar in both groups (95% and 98%, respectively). Cefepime treatment was better tolerated, with 9% of the patients experiencing related intercurrent events compared with 19% in the imipenem-cilastatin group (P = 0.003). Nausea/vomiting was significantly more frequent in the imipenem-cilastatin group (15%) than in the cefepime group (5%; P = 0.001). Cefepime monotherapy was as effective as, and better tolerated than, imipenem-cilastatin in the empirical treatment of fever during short duration neutropenia.

Phase I study of paclitaxel and epirubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a preliminary report on safety.

Attempting to develop a new active, convenient regimen, we initiated a phase I study of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) combined with epirubicin (Farmitalia Carlo Erba, Milan, Italy) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. In addition to standard eligibility criteria, patients with chemotherapy-naive metastasis and at least one measurable lesion had to have left ventricular ejection fractions of at least 50%; the metastatic relapse had to have occurred more than 6 months after adjuvant treatment. Anthracycline-pretreated patients could not have received cumulative doses of more than 300 mg/m2 doxorubicin, 450 mg/m2 epirubicin, or 70 mg/m2 mitoxantrone. An intravenous bolus dose of epirubicin was followed by a 3-hour paclitaxel infusion, with courses repeated every 3 weeks. To date, seven dose levels have been investigated and 31 patients have been treated, 19 of whom had already received anthracyclines. Grades 3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 37% and 19% of 123 courses, respectively, with five episodes of febrile neutropenia. Grade 2 or 3 neurotoxicity has been observed in 42% of patients and cardiac toxicity in four patients (13%), all of whom had already received anthracyclines. One patient experienced transient myocardial ischemia, one had an asymptomatic decrease in ejection fraction, and two patients had clinical heart failure that required treatment. Dose-limiting toxicity was reached at dose level 5 (paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 60 mg/m2), with two of three patients experiencing febrile neutropenia. Reducing the epirubicin dose to 50 mg/m2, however, allowed the paclitaxel dose to be escalated to 250 mg/m2. At this dose level, only one of six patients experienced febrile neutropenia. At a preliminary response evaluation (dose levels 1 to 6), 11 patients (44%) had partial responses, 12 patients (48%) had stable disease, and disease progressed in two patients. We conclude that the combination paclitaxel/epirubicin is safe for patients with metastatic breast cancer and, at this early evaluation, shows promising antitumor activity. Additional patients will be treated at dose level 5 to confirm whether dose-limiting toxicity occurs at this step. Indeed, we took into consideration that dose-limiting toxicity observed at this particular dose level in two of three patients might be due to hazard, since paclitaxel dose escalation up to 250 mg/m2 was further possible in association with 50 mg/m2 epirubicin.