An open randomised trial of second-line endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer. comparison of the aromatase inhibitors letrozole and anastrozole. Double-blind, randomized placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: results from EFECT. Endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal breast cancer. Estrogen-receptor-directed neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: results of a randomised trial using formestane and methotrexate, mitozantrone and mitomycin C (MMM) chemotherapy. [A randomized trial of endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, and chemo-endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer]. Megestrol acetate and aminoglutethimide/hydrocortisone in sequence or in combination as second-line endocrine therapy of estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group phase III trial. A randomized trial in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer comparing endocrine and cytotoxic therapy given sequentially or in combination. The Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Clinical Oncological Society of Australia. Phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, for advanced breast cancer versus megestrol acetate. Randomized adjuvant trial of tamoxifen and goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: evidence for the superiority of treatment with endocrine blockade in premenopausal patients with hormone-responsive breast cancer--Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 5. [Management of advanced breast cancer in post-menopausal women. A comparative trial of hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and a combination of both]. Efficacy of sequential cyclical hormonal therapy in endometrial cancer and its correlation with steroid hormone receptor status. Efficacy of zoledronic acid in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole: 36-month results of the ZO-FAST Study. A reduction in the requirements for mastectomy in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy in primary breast cancer. Comparison of the selective aromatase inhibitor formestane with tamoxifen as first-line hormonal therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Prospective randomized study of aminoglutethimide (AG) versus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) versus AG+MPA in generalized breast cancer. Trial of aminoglutethimide vs hydrocortisone as second-line hormone treatment of advanced breast cancer. Mature results of a randomized phase II multicenter study of exemestane versus tamoxifen as first-line hormone therapy for postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Combined androgen and antimetabolite therapy of advanced female breast cancer. A report of the cooperative breast cancer group. Adjuvant endocrine treatment (goserelin vs tamoxifen) in pre-menopausal patients with operable node positive stage II breast cancer. A prospective randomized national multicenter study. Zoledronic acid effectively prevents aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole: Z-FAST study 36-month follow-up results. Letrozole, a new oral aromatase inhibitor for advanced breast cancer: double-blind randomized trial showing a dose effect and improved efficacy and tolerability compared with megestrol acetate. Letrozole, a new oral aromatase inhibitor: randomised trial comparing 2.5 mg daily, 0.5 mg daily and aminoglutethimide in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Letrozole International Trial Group (AR/BC3). Hormonal treatment for metastatic breast cancer. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Phase III trial comparing aminoglutethimide to tamoxifen. Survival of premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Long-term follow-up of Eastern Cooperative Group and Cancer and Leukemia Group B studies. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. Adjuvant estrogen following radiation therapy for stage C adenocarcinoma of the prostate: long-term results of a prospective randomized study. Exemestane is superior to megestrol acetate after tamoxifen failure in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of a phase III randomized double-blind trial. The Exemestane Study Group. Fulvestrant (Faslodex) versus anastrozole for the second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer in subgroups of postmenopausal women with visceral and non-visceral metastases: combined results from two multicentre trials. High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer: the French PEGASE experience. Combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: two regimens containing adriamycin. A randomised study of CGS 16949A (fadrozole) versus tamoxifen in previously untreated postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer.
It was previously shown that letrozole (Femara) was significantly more potent than anastrozole (Arimidex) in inhibiting aromatase activity in vitro and in inhibiting total body aromatisation in patients with breast cancer. The objective of this study was to compare letrozole (2.5 mg per day) and anastrozole (1 mg per day) as endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with an anti-oestrogen. This randomised, multicentre and multinational open-label phase IIIb/IV study enrolled 713 patients. Treatment was for advanced breast cancer that had progressed either during anti-oestrogen therapy or within 12 months of completing that therapy. Patients had tumours that were either positive for oestrogen and/or progesterone receptors (48%) or of unknown receptor status (52%). The primary efficacy endpoint was time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints included objective response, duration of response, rate and duration of overall clinical benefit (responses and long-term stable disease), time to treatment failure, and overall survival, as well as general safety. There was no difference between the treatment arms in TTP; median times were the same for both treatments. Letrozole was significantly superior to anastrozole in the overall response rate (ORR) (19.1% versus 12.3%, P=0.013), including in predefined subgroups (receptor status-unknown, and soft-tissue- and viscera-dominant site of disease). There were no significant differences between the treatment arms in the rate of clinical benefit, median duration of response, duration of clinical benefit, time to treatment failure or overall survival. Both agents were well tolerated and there were no significant differences in safety. These results support previous data documenting the greater aromatase-inhibiting activity of letrozole and indicate that advanced breast cancer is more responsive to letrozole than to anastrozole as second-line endocrine therapy. The third-generation nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are increasingly used as adjuvant and first-line advanced therapy for postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. Because many patients subsequently experience progression or relapse, it is important to identify agents with efficacy after AI failure.
                Evaluation of Faslodex versus Exemestane Clinical Trial (EFECT) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, multicenter phase III trial of fulvestrant versus exemestane in postmenopausal women with HR+ advanced breast cancer (ABC) progressing or recurring after nonsteroidal AI. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A fulvestrant loading-dose (LD) regimen was used: 500 mg intramuscularly on day 0, 250 mg on days 14, 28, and 250 mg every 28 days thereafter. Exemestane 25 mg orally was administered once daily.
                A total of 693 women were randomly assigned to fulvestrant (n = 351) or exemestane (n = 342). Approximately 60% of patients had received at least two prior endocrine therapies. Median TTP was 3.7 months in both groups (hazard ratio = 0.963; 95% CI, 0.819 to 1.133; P = .6531). The overall response rate (7.4% v 6.7%; P = .736) and clinical benefit rate (32.2% v 31.5%; P = .853) were similar between fulvestrant and exemestane respectively. Median duration of clinical benefit was 9.3 and 8.3 months, respectively. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events or quality of life. Pharmacokinetic data confirm that steady-state was reached within 1 month with the LD schedule of fulvestrant.
                Fulvestrant LD and exemestane are equally active and well-tolerated in a meaningful proportion of postmenopausal women with ABC who have experienced progression or recurrence during treatment with a nonsteroidal AI. Ovarian suppression plus tamoxifen is a standard adjuvant treatment in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients, and preclinical data suggest that zoledronic acid has antitumor properties.
                We examined the effect of adding zoledronic acid to a combination of either goserelin and tamoxifen or goserelin and anastrozole in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. We randomly assigned 1803 patients to receive goserelin (3.6 mg given subcutaneously every 28 days) plus tamoxifen (20 mg per day given orally) or anastrozole (1 mg per day given orally) with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg given intravenously every 6 months) for 3 years. The primary end point was disease-free survival; recurrence-free survival and overall survival were secondary end points.
                After a median follow-up of 47.8 months, 137 events had occurred, with disease-free survival rates of 92.8% in the tamoxifen group, 92.0% in the anastrozole group, 90.8% in the group that received endocrine therapy alone, and 94.0% in the group that received endocrine therapy with zoledronic acid. There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between the anastrozole and tamoxifen groups (hazard ratio for disease progression in the anastrozole group, 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.53; P=0.59). The addition of zoledronic acid to endocrine therapy, as compared with endocrine therapy without zoledronic acid, resulted in an absolute reduction of 3.2 percentage points and a relative reduction of 36% in the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.91; P=0.01); the addition of zoledronic acid did not significantly reduce the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.11; P=0.11). Adverse events were consistent with known drug-safety profiles.
                The addition of zoledronic acid to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves disease-free survival in premenopausal patients with estrogen-responsive early breast cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00295646.)
                2009 Massachusetts Medical Society We wanted to determine whether neoadjuvant systemic chemoendocrine therapy guided by the estrogen receptor (ER) status of the primary breast cancer, followed by conventional surgery and/or radiotherapy, reduces local and distant recurrence and improves survival compared with adjuvant treatment given conventionally postoperatively.
                Two hundred ten patients with primary breast cancer (T1-T4, N0, N1-2) were randomised to receive treatment with neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy or conventional post-operative chemoendocrine therapy. Systemic therapy was based on the estrogen receptor (ER) status of the primary tumour obtained by trucut core biopsy. ER-negative patients received MMM chemotherapy (methotrexate (30 mg/m2), mitozantrone (7 mg/m2) and mitomycin (7 mg/m2) three-weekly for three months and ER-positive patients who were premenopausal received goserelin (3.75 mg monthly), and post menopausal women formestane (250 mg every two weeks) over three months.
                With a minimum of five years follow-up, there is no evidence of any survival benefit from the pretreatment neoadjuvant therapy regimen, with five year overall survival being 79% +/- 4.7% (neoadjuvant) and 87% +/- 3.4% (adjuvant). Similarly, there was no apparent benefit in terms of disease-free survival. There was, however, a significant reduction in the incidence of distant metastases in responders (4 of 51; 8%) compared with non-responders (17 of 49; 35%) (P < 0.01). There was a reduction in the need for surgery in responding patients with T1 and T2 tumours, since 10 of 74 (14%) had no detectable residual tumour, without any apparent increase in the risk of local or distant recurrence.
                In this study neoadjuvant treatment with endocrine or chemotherapy provided no obvious survival benefit to women with breast cancer. However, it does allow avoidance of surgery in some cases. Also, the patients whose tumours respond to neoadjuvant systemic therapy have a lower incidence of distant metastases after five year follow-up compared to those whose tumours fail to respond. A randomized trial of endocrine therapy (adreno-oophorectomy, H), chemotherapy (FAC, C), chemoendocrine therapy (FAC + tamoxifen, H'C, or FAC + adreno-oophorectomy, HC) was performed in 114 advanced breast cancer patients from September, 1979 to December, 1983, and 106 were evaluable. The response to H, C, H'C, and HC was shown to be 33% (10/30), 54% (14/26), 59% (17/29), and 76% (16/21), respectively. There was a significantly higher response rate in HC group than H group. Higher but not significantly different response was obtained by H'C as compared with H. There were no significant differences in the overall survival among the treatment arms. However, patients treated with H survived longer (greater than 5 years). These results suggest that higher response obtained by chemotherapy, alone or in combination with endocrine therapy does not seem to contribute to the prolongation of survival of the patients. A phase III randomized trial was performed to determine whether combination hormonal therapy with aminoglutethimide (AG) and hydrocortisone (HC) plus megestrol acetate (MA) improved response rates, response duration, or increased survival over the sequential use of each hormone in women with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had maintained stable disease for at least 6 months or responded to tamoxifen.
                Two hundred eighty-eight postmenopausal women with progressive estrogen receptor-positive MBC were randomly selected to receive MA 40 mg four times daily (arm I), AG 250 mg four times daily with HC 40 mg daily in divided doses (arm II), versus the combination of MA plus AG given at the same dosages (arm III). Patients on arms I and II who progressed after an adequate trial were crossed over to the other treatment arm.
                Two hundred thirty-five eligible patients were evaluated for response, time to treatment failure, and survival. Response was only reported for patients with measurable disease and was not statistically different among the three arms. There were two partial responses (PRs) on MA (6%), four complete responses (CRs) and six PRs on AG (24%), and eight PRs and three CRs on MA plus AG (23%) in 32, 42, and 48 measurable patients, respectively. Median times to treatment failure were also similar at 5, 4, and 7 months. Survival was also not statistically different among the three arms at 26, 27, and 26 months for arms I, II, and III, respectively. Toxicity was greater in the two AG arms with respect to fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and rash.
                With the exception of toxicity, there is no response, time to treatment failure, or survival benefit for any one group when comparing MA, AG, or the combination at their stated doses in women with estrogen receptor-positive MBC who had previously responded to or stabilized with tamoxifen. A prospective randomized clinical trial was performed in 339 postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. Two single modality treatment sequences, doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide (AC) followed on failure by tamoxifen (TAM), and TAM followed by AC, were compared with combined modality chemo-endocrine therapy (TAM plus AC). The response rate to initial TAM (22.1%) was inferior to that for AC (45.1%), and for TAM plus AC (51.3%). However, patients randomized to the sequence TAM followed by AC showed a 42.5% overall tumor response to sequential protocol therapy, similar to the 46.9% for those randomized to AC followed by TAM. Furthermore, survival in all three arms was almost identical. Adverse prognostic factors for survival were liver metastases, short disease-free interval, poor performance status, and prior adjuvant chemotherapy. In no subgroup was significantly better survival associated with initial cytotoxic therapy. Endocrine therapy followed on failure by cytotoxics is appropriate for postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. To compare two doses of letrozole (0.5 mg and 2.5 mg every day) and megestrol acetate (40 mg qid) as endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with antiestrogens.
                This double-blind, randomized, multicenter, multinational study enrolled 602 patients, all of whom were included in the primary analysis in the protocol. Patients had advanced or metastatic breast cancer with evidence of disease progression while receiving continuous adjuvant antiestrogen therapy, had experienced relapse within 12 months of stopping adjuvant antiestrogen therapy given for at least 6 months, or had experienced disease progression while receiving antiestrogen therapy for advanced disease. Tumors were required to be estrogen receptor- and/or progesterone receptor-positive or of unknown status. Confirmed objective response rate was the primary efficacy variable. Karnofsky Performance Status and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life assessments were collected for 1 year.
                There were no statistically significant differences among the three treatment groups for overall objective tumor response. Patients treated with letrozole 0.5 mg had improvements in disease progression (P =.044) and a decreased risk of treatment failure (P =.018), compared with patients treated with megestrol acetate. Letrozole 0.5 mg showed a trend (P =.053) for survival benefit when compared with megestrol acetate. Megestrol acetate was more likely to produce weight gain, dyspnea, and vaginal bleeding, and the letrozole groups were more likely to experience headache, hair thinning, and diarrhea.
                Given a favorable tolerability profile, once-daily dosing, and evidence of clinically relevant benefit, letrozole is equivalent to megestrol acetate and should be considered for use as an alternative treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women after treatment failure with antiestrogens. Effective adjuvant treatment modalities in premenopausal breast cancer patients today include chemotherapy, ovariectomy, and tamoxifen administration. The purpose of Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 5 was to compare the efficacy of a combination endocrine treatment with standard chemotherapy.
                Assessable trial subjects (N = 1,034) presenting with hormone-responsive disease were randomized to receive either 3 years of goserelin plus 5 years of tamoxifen or six cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF). Stratification criteria included tumor stage and grade, number of involved nodes, type of surgery, and steroid hormone receptor content. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was defined as time from randomization to first relapse, local recurrence, or contralateral incidence, and overall survival (OS) as time to date of death.
                With a 60-month median follow-up, 17.2% of patients in the endocrine group and 20.8% undergoing chemotherapy developed relapses. Local recurrences emerged in 4.7% and 8.0%, respectively. RFS and local recurrence-free survival differed significantly in favor of endocrine therapy (P =.037 and P =.015), with a similar trend observed in OS (P =.195).
                Overall, our data suggest that the goserelin-tamoxifen combination is significantly more effective than CMF in the adjuvant treatment of premenopausal patients with stage I and II breast cancer. A randomized trial was done in 98 post-menopausal women with breast cancer. Hormonal receptors had not been assayed in any patient. Patients were given hormonal therapy with tamoxifen and drostanolone propionate (n = 34), or chemotherapy with the CMF protocol (n = 30), or a combination of both (n = 34). The results are in favour of hormonal therapy alone, which gave the best immediate objective responses, the least adverse side-effects, and possibly improved survival rates. Forty-six eligible women with metastatic endometrial cancer were randomly allocated to receive monthly cycles of either CAF (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, 5-fluorouracil) or CAF plus Provera 200 mg daily for 3 weeks followed cyclically by Tamoxifen 20 mg daily for 3 weeks. Overall response rates of 15 and 43% were seen with CAF and CAF plus hormonal therapy. Using a multivariate analysis of the results, this difference is significant (P value 0.05). In 8 patients with operable endometrial cancer, negative estrogen receptor concentration (ER less than 15 fmole/mg protein) and Grade 3 disease, the clinical course was aggressive in 4 patients with systemic and local relapse. In 10 other similar patients (negative ER and Grade 3) who received adjuvant cyclical hormonal therapy only 1 relapsed and the other 9 are disease-free for an average of more than 31 months. Sequential cyclical hormonal therapy with ER and progesterone receptor analysis has a place in the management of endometrial carcinoma. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are accepted as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women (PMW) with hormone-responsive early breast cancer (EBC) with superior efficacy to tamoxifen. However, increased bone loss is associated with AIs.
                PMW with EBC receiving letrozole (2.5 mg/day for 5 years) were randomly assigned to immediate zoledronic acid (ZOL; 4 mg every 6 months) or delayed ZOL (initiated only for fracture or high risk thereof).
                Patients (N = 1065) had a median age of 58 years; 54% had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. At 36 months, mean change in L2-L4 bone mineral density (BMD) was +4.39% for immediate versus -4.9% for delayed ZOL (P < 0.0001). Between-group differences were 5.27% at 12 months, 7.94% at 24 months, and 9.29% at 36 months (P < 0.0001 for all). At 36 months, the immediate-ZOL group had a significant 41% relative risk reduction for disease-free survival (DFS) events (P = 0.0314). Adverse events are consistent with the known safety profiles of the study drugs.
                At 36 months, immediate ZOL was more effective in preserving BMD during letrozole therapy. Immediate versus delayed ZOL led to significantly improved DFS. Benefits are observed in the context of a favorable, well-established safety profile for letrozole and ZOL. A prospective randomised trial was undertaken to evaluate the role of neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy prior to surgery in primary operable breast cancer.
                Three hundred nine women (median age 56 years, range 27-70) with primary operable breast cancer confirmed on fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology were recruited to this study. They were treated with a combination of mitozantrone and methotrexate (+/- mitomycin-C) combined with tamoxifen (2MT). Patients received eight cycles of 2MT (four prior to surgery in the neoadjuvant group) and tamoxifen for five years with appropriate surgery and radiotherapy. The two groups were comparable for age, menopausal status, stage and surgical requirements.
                The clinical response rates to neoadjuvant therapy were as follows: 22% complete response (CR), 29% minimal residual disease (MRD), 33% partial response (PR), 15% no change (NC) and only two patients had clinical evidence of progressive disease. Surgical requirements were reduced from 31 patients (22%) of the adjuvant group having mastectomy to 14 (10%) in the neoadjuvant group (P < 0.003). At a median follow-up of 48 months (range 10-70 months) there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of local relapse, metastatic relapse or overall survival. Symptomatic and haematologic acute toxicity was low and similar for adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy.
                This randomised trial has shown a significant reduction in the surgical requirements for mastectomy, after treatment with neoadjuvant chemoendocrine therapy, with no deterioration in local or distal relapse. A total of 409 postmenopausal patients with advanced metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive either formestane (Lentaron) 250 mg every 2 weeks by intramuscular injection, or tamoxifen 30 mg/day orally. Treatment continued until tumor progression. The groups were well matched for pretreatment characteristics including age, performance status, hormone receptor status (patients with known negative receptor status of their primary tumor were excluded), site and extent of metastases, disease-free interval, and previous primary and adjuvant therapy. Patients were assessed for antitumor efficacy at 3-monthly intervals using UICC criteria. Of the 348 patients evaluable for response, 33% had an objective response to formestane (14 complete and 43 partial responses), while 37% had an objective response to tamoxifen (10 complete and 54 partial responses). Median duration of response was 15 months for formestane and 20 months for tamoxifen; survival was 35 and 38 months respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the treatments for all these variables, but time to disease progression and time to treatment failure significantly favoured tamoxifen. Systemic tolerability was excellent for both treatments. Local side effects due to intramuscular injection of formestane were mild and transient. In this comparative trial of first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer, formestane gave results comparable to tamoxifen for both efficacy and tolerability. We conclude that formestane is an effective and well tolerated addition to the therapeutic options available for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Eighty-five postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive aminoglutethimide (AG), medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), or AG+MPA. Patients with aggressive visceral disease were excluded. Response was observed in 36% of the patients in the AG treatment group, 31% in the MPA treatment group, and 47% in the combination treatment group. Statistical analysis showed that the percentage of responders was not different among the three treatment groups. Similarly, the duration of response did not differ. Toxicity of all three regimens was moderate, not necessitating discontinuation of treatment. In conclusion, AG, MPA and the combination of AG+MPA were found to be equally effective therapies for metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women with nonaggressive visceral disease. The lack of statistically significant superiority of the combination of AG+MPA suggests that sequential endocrine monotherapies may be more beneficial than combined hormonotherapies for this patient population. In a randomized trial of second line hormone therapy 56 postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer received low dose aminoglutethimide (AGT) 125 mg twice daily without hydrocortisone (27 patients), or hydrocortisone (HC) 20 mg twice daily (29 patients). The two groups were well-matched for previous response to tamoxifen (TAM) therapy (AGT (35%) vs HC (32%)) and for relapse on adjuvant TAM. The mean age of the two groups was 69.2 years (AGT) and 63.2 years (HC). Liver metastases were present in 29% (AGT) and 33% (HC). The response rates were 11% (AGT) and 21% (HC). At 12 months the failure of treatment rate was 80% (AGT) and 70% (HC). Survival at 12 months was 50% for both groups. At 12 months 5/12 survivors were still on AGT and 8/12 on HC. These preliminary findings have so far failed to show any statistical difference in tumour response, time to treatment failure or survival between low-dose AGT and HC as second-line hormone treatment post-tamoxifen in advanced breast cancer. Women with hormone-responsive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may respond to or have stable disease with a number of hormone therapies. We explored the efficacy and safety of the steroidal aromatase inactivator exemestane as first-line hormonal therapy in MBC in postmenopausal women.
                Patients with measurable disease were eligible if they had received no prior hormone therapy for metastatic disease and had hormone receptor positive disease or hormone receptor unknown disease with a long disease-free interval from adjuvant therapy. They were randomized to tamoxifen 20 mg/day or exemestane 25 mg/day in this open-label study.
                Blinded independently reviewed response rates for exemestane and tamoxifen were 41% and 17%, respectively. Fifty-seven per cent of exemestane- and 42% of tamoxifen-treated patients experienced clinical benefit, defined as complete or partial response, or disease stabilization lasting at least 6 months. There was a low incidence of severe flushing, sweating, nausea and edema in women who received exemestane. One exemestane-treated patient had a pulmonary embolism with grade 4 dyspnea.
                Exemestane is well tolerated and active in the first-line treatment of hormone-responsive MBC. An ongoing EORTC phase III trial is comparing the efficacy, measuring time-to-disease progression, of exemestane and tamoxifen. A clinical trial of androgen and antimetabolite therapy of advanced female breast cancer was conducted in 110 patients by the Cooperative Breast Cancer Group. An objective regression rate of 20% was achieved in women receiving oral testolactone, 6% in patients given intravenous fluorouracil alone, and 14% when the androgen and antimetabolite were administered together. This randomized trial according to the CBCG protocol did not produce the high regression rate noted previously in a nonrandomized, nonprotocol evaluation of these drugs. To evaluate possible differences in effect on time to recurrence and overall survival in node positive pre-menopausal breast cancer patients (age < or = 50 years) receiving LHRH analogue or tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine treatment.
                Between January 1989 and July 1994, 320 patients with node positive (pN(+)) and hormone receptor positive or receptor status unknown tumors were included and randomized in a national multicenter study to receive either tamoxifen or goserelin as adjuvant treatment for two years. Primary surgical treatment was employed according to current standards. Final follow-up was completed as of December 2000. Time to events were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared by the log rank test. Relative risks were estimated by the Cox's proportional hazards model.
                No differences in time to first recurrence or overall survival were observed between treatment groups. Proportions of patients in each group having a second breast cancer were also similar.
                Standard adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen as compared to adjuvant LHRH analogue therapy employed in this group of breast cancer patients gave similar outcomes, but the number of patients was too small to formally exclude a potentially clinically relevant difference in survival. Postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are at risk for accelerated bone loss and subsequent fractures. The ongoing Zometa-Femara Adjuvant Synergy Trial (Z-FAST) is evaluating the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in preventing such bone loss.
                In this multicenter study, postmenopausal women with early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole were randomized to receive up-front or delayed-start zoledronic acid (ZA; 4 mg intravenously every 6 months) for 5 years. Delayed-start ZA was administered if the lumbar spine (LS) or total hip (TH) T score fell below -2.0 or a nontraumatic fracture occurred. The primary endpoint was to compare the change from baseline in LS bone mineral density (BMD) between groups at month 12; secondary endpoints, measured at other predetermined timepoints, included comparing changes in TH BMD, LS BMD, and markers of bone turnover, fracture incidence, and time to disease recurrence. Herein, we report the results of the 36-month interim analysis.
                Overall, 301 patients were randomized to each group. At month 36, the absolute difference in mean LS and TH BMDs between the up-front and delayed groups was 6.7% and 5.2%, respectively (P < .0001 for both). Although this study was not designed to show antifracture efficacy, the incidence of fractures was slightly higher in the delayed group (up-front, 17 [5.7%] vs. delayed, 19 [6.3%]) but not statistically significant (P = .8638). Pyrexia (27 [9%] vs. 6 [2%]; P = .0002) and bone pain (39 [13%] vs. 20 [6.7%]; P = .01) were more common in up-front patients; cough (13 [4.3%] vs. 27 [9%]; P = .03) was more common in delayed patients. No severe renal dysfunction or confirmed cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported. Disease recurrence was reported in 9 up-front (3.0%) and 16 delayed (5.3%) patients (Kaplan-Meier analysis, P = .127), with an absolute decrease of 2.3%.
                Up-front ZA more effectively prevents AI-associated bone loss in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer than delaying therapy until substantial bone loss or fracture occurs. To compare two doses of letrozole and megestrol acetate (MA) as second-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with antiestrogens.
                Five hundred fifty-one patients with locally advanced, locoregionally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive letrozole 2.5 mg (n = 174), letrozole 0.5 mg (n = 188), or MA 160 mg (n = 189) once daily in a double-blind, multicenter trial. Data were analyzed for tumor response and safety variables up to 33 months of follow-up evaluation and for survival up to 45 months.
                Letrozole 2.5 mg produced a significantly higher overall objective response rate (24%) compared with MA (16%; logistic regression, P = .04) or letrozole 0.5 mg (13%; P = .004). Duration of objective response was significantly longer for letrozole 2.5 mg compared with MA (Cox regression, P = .02). Letrozole 2.5 mg was significantly superior to MA and letrozole 0.5 mg in time to treatment failure (P = .04 and P = .002, respectively). For time to progression, letrozole 2.5 mg was superior to letrozole 0.5 mg (P = .02), but not to MA (P = .07). There was a significant dose effect in overall survival in favor of letrozole 2.5 mg (P = .03) compared with letrozole 0.5 mg. Letrozole was significantly better tolerated than MA with respect to serious adverse experiences, discontinuation due to poor tolerability, cardiovascular side effects, and weight gain.
                The data show letrozole 2.5 mg once daily to be more effective and better tolerated than MA in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer previously treated with antiestrogens. The study compares letrozole and aminoglutethimide (AG), a standard therapy for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with antioestrogens.
                555 women were randomly assigned letrozole 2.5 mg once daily (n = 185), letrozole 0.5 mg once daily (n = 192) or aminoglutethimide 250 mg twice daily with corticosteroid support (n = 178) in an open-label, multicentre trial. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), with time events as secondary. ORR was analysed nine months after enrollment of the last patient, while survival was analysed 15 months after the last patient was enrolled. We report the results of these analyses plus an extended period of observation (covering a total duration of approximately 45 months) to determine the duration of response and clinical benefit.
                Overall objective response rates (complete + partial) of 19.5%, 16.7% and 12.4% were seen for letrozole 2.5 mg, 0.5 mg and AG respectively. Median duration of response and stable disease was longest for letrozole 2.5 mg (21 months) compared with letrozole 0.5 mg (18 months) and AG (14 months). Letrozole 2.5 mg was superior to AG in time to progression, time to treatment failure and overall survival. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in fewer patients on letrozole (33%) than on AG (46%). Transient nausea was the most frequent event with letrozole (7% on 0.5 mg, 10% on 2.5 mg, 10% on AG), rash with AG (11%, 1% on 0.5 mg, 3% on 2.5 mg letrozole).
                Letrozole 2.5 mg offers longer disease control than aminoglutethimide and letrozole 0.5 mg in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anti-oestrogens. Tamoxifen and aminoglutethimide are two hormone therapies reported to be effective palliative approaches for patients with metastatic breast cancer. The current trial was designed to evaluate their relative therapeutic effectiveness.
                Two hundred forty-nine postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer were randomized in an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Phase III study to treatment with adrenalectomy, aminoglutethimide, or tamoxifen with crossover to alternate therapy if disease progressed. Adrenalectomy was dropped as a treatment after 2 years because of low patient accrual.
                There were 216 evaluable patients entered in the study with 108 initially randomized to aminoglutethimide and 108 to receive tamoxifen therapy. The overall response rate for aminoglutethimide was 45%, and for tamoxifen it was 27%. One institution had a response rate of 60% with aminoglutethimide and only 4% with tamoxifen, whereas all of the other institutions combined had a response rate of 41% with aminoglutethimide and 34% with tamoxifen. Eighty-seven evaluable patients crossed over to the other drug (44 to aminoglutethimide and 43 to tamoxifen). There was a 36% response rate to aminoglutethimide and 19% to tamoxifen, with stable disease in 36% of both groups. The overall survival rates were identical. Toxicity was greater with aminoglutethimide (dermatitis) but was not life-threatening. Glucocorticoid support with either dexamethasone or hydrocortisone was acceptable.
                Both aminoglutethimide and tamoxifen produced responses in postmenopausal patients with breast cancer, and a significant number of crossover responses were observed. Of interest in this randomized study was the observation that one institution had a markedly different response rate on induction, reinforcing the need for multi-institution trials in Phase III studies. In premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, differences in survival curves early during follow-up can be misleading. The authors therefore analyzed long-term survival in 378 patients, entered in three randomized trials, started between 1973 and 1978. Combined data from the three trials were used to increase the power for identifying prognostic variables. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trial 7382 randomized patients to oophorectomy plus either cyclophosphamide or combination chemotherapy or observation. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2174 randomized patients who had not progressed 3 months after oophorectomy to combination chemotherapy or combination chemotherapy or observation. Trial ECOG 2177 randomized estrogen receptor (ER) positive or ER-unknown patients to oophorectomy plus combination chemotherapy or immediate combination chemotherapy, and ER-negative patients were directly assigned to combination chemotherapy. Hence ER-negative patients need not have been healthy enough to be randomized to oophorectomy. With only 14% of the patients still alive, median survival on the three studies was 30, 24, and 28 months. The median survival of individual treatments changed noticeably in ECOG 2174 and ECOG 2177 with long-term follow-up. At this time there are no differences in survival between randomized regimens in any of the three trials. In a multivariate model, factors associated with significantly poorer survival were visceral-dominant disease, nodal metastases, breast metastases, age younger than 45 years, ER negativity, and not receiving chemotherapy immediately after oophorectomy. This treatment difference was thus not due to imbalances in the prognostic variables used in the model, but it may be due to imbalances of unknown prognostic factors or differences in patient selection. In 1986, a protocol comparing primary radiation therapy (RT) plus hydroxyurea (HU) to irradiation plus fluorouracil (5-FU) and cisplatin (CF) was activated by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) for the treatment of patients with locally advanced cervical carcinoma. The goals were to determine the superior chemoradiation regimen and to quantitate the relative toxicities.
                All patients had biopsy-proven invasive squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Patients underwent standard clinical staging studies and their tumors were found to be International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics stages IIB, III, or IVA. Negative cytologic washings and para-aortic lymph nodes were required for entry. Patients were randomized to receive either standard whole pelvic RT with concurrent 5-FU infusion and bolus CF or the same RT plus oral HU.
                Of 388 randomized patients, 368 were eligible; 177 were randomized to CF and 191 to HU. Adverse effects were predominantly hematologic or gastrointestinal in both regimens. Severe or life-threatening leukopenia was more common in the HU group (24%) than in the CF group (4%). The difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was statistically significant in favor of the CF group (P = .033). The sites of progression in the two treatment groups were not substantially different. Survival was significantly better for the patients randomized to CF (P = .018).
                This study demonstrates that for patients with locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix, the combination of 5-FU and CF with RT offers patients better PFS and overall survival than HU, and with manageable toxicity. Seventy-eight patients with clinical Stage C adenocarcinoma of the prostate were prospectively randomized to receive either radiation alone or radiation and adjuvant estrogen (diethylstilbestrol). No patient had received any prior definitive treatment for cancer. Forty patients were randomized to receive radiotherapy only and 38 patients to receive radiotherapy and estrogen. The median follow-up for all surviving patients was 14.5 years. Whether analyzed according to the original randomization or according to the treatment actually received, disease-free survival in the adjuvant estrogen group was strikingly and significantly higher than in the radiation-only group. At 5, 10, and 15 years patients receiving adjuvant estrogen had respective disease-free survival rates of 71%, 63%, and 63% compared with 49%, 43%, and 35% in patients having radiation only (p = 0.008). However, because of greater intercurrent disease-related mortality in patients receiving estrogen, there was no improvement in survival. This study suggests that a prospective randomized evaluation of early androgen deprivation with orchiectomy or with one of the nonestrogenic agents should be undertaken and that patients receiving early androgen deprivation should not be included in series reporting on the curative potential of radiation as a single modality. This phase III, double-blind, randomized, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, and safety of the oral aromatase inactivator exemestane (EXE) versus megestrol acetate (MA) in postmenopausal women with progressive advanced breast cancer who experienced failure of tamoxifen.
                A total of 769 patients were randomized to EXE 25 mg/d (n = 366) or MA (n = 403) 40 mg four times daily. Tumor response, duration of tumor control, tumor-related signs and symptoms (TRSS), quality of life (QOL), survival, and tolerability were evaluated.
                Overall objective response (OR) rates were higher in patients treated with EXE than in those treated with MA (15.0% v 12.4%); a similar trend was noted in patients with visceral metastases (13.5% v 10.5%). Median survival time was significantly longer with EXE (median not reached) than with MA (123.4 weeks; P =.039), as were the median duration of overall success (OR or stable disease > or = 24 weeks; 60.1 v 49.1 weeks; P =.025), time to tumor progression (20.3 v 16.6 weeks; P =.037), and time to treatment failure (16.3 v 15.7 weeks; P =.042). Compared with MA, there were similar or greater improvements in pain, TRSS, and QOL with EXE. Both drugs were well tolerated. Grade 3 or 4 weight changes were more common with MA (17.1% v 7.6%; P =.001).
                EXE prolongs survival time, time to tumor progression, and time to treatment failure compared with MA and offers a well-tolerated treatment option for postmenopausal women with progressive advanced breast cancer who experienced failure of tamoxifen. The efficacy of fulvestrant (Faslodex), a novel oestrogen receptor (ER) antagonist that downregulates the ER and has no known agonist effects, was compared with the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole (Arimidex) for the second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women with visceral and non-visceral metastases. Assessment was by means of a retrospective subgroup analysis of combined data from two randomised, phase III trials. Objective response (OR) rates were similar in patients treated with fulvestrant and anastrozole, respectively (21.9% versus 19.3%-patients with no visceral metastases; 15.7% versus 13.2%-all of the patients with visceral metastases; 18.8% versus 14.0%-patients with visceral metastases only). The proportion of patients with clinical benefit (CB) was also similar between treatments and between subgroups with and without visceral disease. Fulvestrant is at least as effective as anastrozole, providing a valuable treatment option for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women with visceral metastases who have failed on prior endocrine therapy. Early studies of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) for breast cancer were limited by small numbers and the lack of adequate control groups. The French PEGASE Group was founded to perform larger and properly randomized comparative studies of this approach.
                The program was created to determine the effects of intensive chemotherapy for breast cancer. The seven PEGASE protocols addressed HDC as adjuvant therapy (01 and 06) and as treatment for inflammatory nonmetastatic disease (02, 05, and 07) and metastatic disease (03 and 04). Two of these protocols are ongoing.
                The PEGASE 01 adjuvant therapy trial showed that 3-year disease-free survival was significantly better in the HDC arm but overall survival was unchanged. The ongoing phase III 06 trial is studying a higher dosage regimen. The HDC trials for metastatic and inflammatory nonmetastatic disease are encouraging.
                Many clinicians no longer subscribe to the concept of HDC for breast cancer. Overall outcomes from management of poor-risk breast cancer remain poor, however, and it is possible that some selected subgroups of patients may benefit from such an approach. Forty-eight women with advanced metastatic carcinoma of the breast were treated with one of two combination chemotherapy regimens: 1) adriamycin and cyclophosphamide or 2) adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil. The response rate in the two-drug treatment group was 50% and in the four-drug treatment group, 55%. The median duration of response was ten months in both treatment groups. Dramatic responses were seen in patients with visceral metastases. Patients who responded to chemotherapy had a significantly longer survival than nonresponders (p less than 0.01). The long interval between adriamycin doses (six weeks) in the four drug regimen did not adversely effect the response rate--an important finding in view of the dose-related cardiac toxicity of this agent. Fadrozole, a potent, highly specific inhibitor of aromatase activity, has only been used as second-line therapy in treatment of post-menopausal women with advanced breast cancer. A prospectively randomised study was therefore undertaken to compare relative clinical efficacy of fadrozole as first-line treatment to that of tamoxifen.
                Eighty postmenopausal women who had not received prior treatment for advanced/metastatic breast cancer were randomised to receive either fadrozole, 1 mg twice daily, or tamoxifen, 20 mg daily.
                Toxicity was not statistically different on the two treatment arms. Only mild to moderate toxicity was documented: hot flashes in 37%, headaches in 6.5%, mild fatigue in 2.6%. There were also no statistically significant differences in objective response rates, survival or time to treatment failure (TTF). Objective response rate on fadrozole was 50% (complete response (CR) 8.3% and partial response (PR) 42%). On tamoxifen objective response was 44.7% (CR 21% and PR 24%). Median TTF was 4.9 months on fadrozole and 5 months on tamoxifen. Median survival was 22.7 months on fadrozole and 27.5 months on tamoxifen.
                While response rates, survival and TTF were not statistically significantly different, there were more complete responses on tamoxifen and duration of objective response (CR + PR) was significantly longer in the patients treated with tamoxifen.
In women with advanced (metastatic) breast cancer, aromatase inhibitors including those in current clinical use show a survival benefit when compared to other endocrine therapy.