Sequenced compared with simultaneous anthracycline and cyclophosphamide in high-risk stage I and II breast cancer: final analysis from INT-0137 (S9313). Multicenter randomized phase III study of the cardioprotective effect of dexrazoxane (Cardioxane) in advanced/metastatic breast cancer patients treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Multicycle dose-intensive chemotherapy for women with high-risk primary breast cancer: results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 15-95. Response and survival in advanced breast cancer after two non-cross-resistant combinations. Superior survival with capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results. Combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: two regimens containing adriamycin. Cyclophosphamide, adriamycin and platinum (CAP) combination chemotherapy, a new effective approach in the treatment of disseminated breast cancer. Preliminary report. Chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer: a randomized trial of vincristine, Adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP). Adriamycin plus alkylating agents in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Randomised, phase II trial comparing oral capecitabine (Xeloda) with paclitaxel in patients with metastatic/advanced breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines. Combination of cyclophosphamide, adriamycin and platinum (CAP) versus 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (FAC) as primary treatment in metastatic breast cancer: results of a prospective randomized study. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus mitomycin plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. 304 Study Group. Comparison of four-combination chemotherapy programs in metastatic breast cancer: comparison of multiple drug therapy with cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone versus cytoxan and adriamycin, versus cytoxan, 5-FU and adriamycin, versus cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone alternating with cytoxan and adriamycin. Randomized prospective clinical trial of high-dose epirubicin and dexrazoxane in patients with advanced breast cancer and soft tissue sarcomas. Alternating versus sequential chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer. A randomized German multicenter trial. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer: final results of a randomized phase III multicenter trial. RIBBON-1: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. An evaluation of the effect of vincristine added to cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, and prednisone in advanced breast cancer. Differential response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor level. Results of a prospective randomized study. High dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation as adjuvant therapy for primary breast cancer patients with four or more lymph nodes involved: long-term results of an international randomised trial. Low dose chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer with cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CAMF) versus sequential cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) and adriamycin. Randomized trial of 3 different regimens of combination chemotherapy in patients receiving simultaneously a hormonal treatment for advanced breast cancer. Docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil plus vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer after anthracycline therapy failure. A randomized trial of adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, ftorafur (ACF) and adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, ftorafur, methotrexate (ACFM) in patients with advanced breast cancer. A phase III clinical trial comparing the combination cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, cisplatin with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone in patients with advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone versus cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone in patients with metastatic breast cancer. A new six-drug antiblastic regimen (R 14) at low doses (micropolychemotherapy) compared to CMF in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: phase III study. Adriamycin versus methotrexate in five-drug combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: a randomized trial. Combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. Prospective comparison of multiple drug therapy with L-phenylalanine mustard. 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.
We conducted a phase III randomized study of two adjuvant treatment schedules of doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) in early-stage breast cancer to determine if administration of sequential single agents (A --> C) results in superior disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) versus the same total dose given in combination (AC).
                High-risk node-negative or low-risk node-positive breast cancer patients received AC given: (arm I) concurrently (AC) doxorubicin 54 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 1.2 g/m2 intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks for six cycles; or (arm II) in sequence (A C) doxorubicin 40.5 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 2 every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by cyclophosphamide 2.4 gm/m2 IV every 2 weeks for three cycles. Total dose and duration were identical, but the intensity of each drug was increased on A C. Both arms included granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support and prophylactic antibiotics. All but premenopausal women with receptor negative tumors received tamoxifen after chemotherapy.
                Between 1994 and 1997, 3,176 patients were randomly assigned. Arms were well balanced; 48% of eligible patients were node-negative and 48% were estrogen receptor-positive. No significant differences in OS or DFS were observed; 5-year estimates of OS (95% CI) were 88% (87% to 90%) on AC and 89% (87% to 91%) on A --> C. Grade 4 hematologic toxicity was greater on A --> C, but nonhematological grade 4 was similar.
                The overall result does not support superiority of dose-intense sequenced single agents. The greater toxicity of higher doses of single agents does not support their sequential use. Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity has led to the adoption of empirical dose limits that may restrict continued use of anthracyclines among patients who might benefit. Dexrazoxane, a cardioprotective agent, has been shown to reduce the risk of anthracycline-associated cardiotoxicity when given from first dose of anthracycline. This study sought to confirm the benefit of dexrazoxane in patients at high risk of cardiotoxicity due to prior anthracycline use.
                A total of 164 female breast cancer patients, previously treated with anthracyclines, received anthracycline-based chemotherapy either with (n = 85) or without (n = 79) dexrazoxane for a maximum of six cycles.
                Compared with those receiving anthracycline alone, patients treated with dexrazoxane experienced significantly fewer cardiac events (39% versus 13%, P < 0.001) and a lower and less severe incidence of congestive heart failure (11% versus 1%, P < 0.05). Tumor response rate was unaffected by dexrazoxane therapy. The frequency of adverse events was similar between groups and there were no significant between-group differences in the number of dose modifications/interruptions.
                Dexrazoxane significantly reduced the occurrence and severity of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in patients at increased risk of cardiac dysfunction due to previous anthracycline treatment without compromising the antitumor efficacy of the chemotherapeutic regimen. To compare adjuvant dose-intensive epirubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy administered with filgrastim and progenitor cell support (DI-EC) with standard-dose anthracycline-based chemotherapy (SD-CT) for patients with early-stage breast cancer and a high risk of relapse, defined as stage II disease with 10 or more positive axillary nodes; or an estrogen receptor-negative or stage III tumor with five or more positive axillary nodes.
                Three hundred forty-four patients were randomized after surgery to receive seven cycles of SD-CT over 22 weeks, or three cycles of DI-EC (epirubicin 200 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 4 gm/m2 with filgrastim and progenitor cell support) over 6 weeks. All patients were assigned tamoxifen at the completion of chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).
                After a median follow-up of 5.8 years (range, 3 to 8.4 years), 188 DFS events had occurred (DI-EC, 86 events; SD-CT, 102 events). The 5-year DFS was 52% for DI-EC and 43% for SD-CT, with hazard ratio of DI-EC compared with SD-CT of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.58 to 1.02; P = .07). The 5-year overall survival was 70% for DI-EC and 61% for SD-CT, with a hazard ratio of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.11; P = .17). There were eight cases (5%) of anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy (two fatal) among those who received DI-EC. Women with hormone receptor-positive tumors benefited significantly from DI-EC.
                There was a trend in favor of DI-EC with respect to disease-free survival. A larger trial or meta-analysis will be required to reveal the true effect of dose-intensive therapy. A prospective study with two cytotoxic combinations (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF), and adriamycin plus vincristine (AV)) was carried out in 110 patients with advanced breast cancer. There was no significant difference between the treatment groups in the response rate after primary treatment, the median duration of response, and the median survival. In both groups responders survived for longer than non-responders. Secondary treatment after crossover for progression or relapse resulted in response rates of 35% for AV and 20% for CMF. Toxicity was mainly represented by reversible haemosuppression. These results are comparable with those obtained with other multiple-drug regimens, and combination chemotherapy alone seems to have reached a plateau in its capacity to control disseminated breast cancer. Docetaxel and capecitabine, a tumor-activated oral fluoropyrimidine, show high single-agent efficacy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and synergy in preclinical studies. This international phase III trial compared efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine/docetaxel therapy with single-agent docetaxel in anthracycline-pretreated patients with MBC.
                Patients were randomized to 21-day cycles of oral capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 255) or to docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 (n = 256).
                Capecitabine/docetaxel resulted in significantly superior efficacy in time to disease progression (TTP) (hazard ratio, 0.652; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.545 to 0.780; P =.0001; median, 6.1 v 4.2 months), overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.634 to 0.947; P =.0126; median, 14.5 v 11.5 months), and objective tumor response rate (42% v 30%, P =.006) compared with docetaxel. Gastrointestinal side effects and hand-foot syndrome were more common with combination therapy, whereas myalgia, arthralgia, and neutropenic fever/sepsis were more common with single-agent docetaxel. More grade 3 adverse events occurred with combination therapy (71% v 49%, respectively), whereas grade 4 events were slightly more common with docetaxel (31% v 25% with combination).
                The significantly superior TTP and survival achieved with the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), with the manageable toxicity profile, indicate that this combination provides clear benefits over single-agent docetaxel 100 mg/m(2). Docetaxel/capecitabine therapy is an important treatment option for women with anthracycline-pretreated MBC. 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. The prospective controlled Phase III clinical trial tested the therapeutic value of the cis-platinum-adriamycin-cyclophosphamide combination (CAP), compared with the combination including cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, vincristine and prednisolone (CMFVP), in untreated metastatic breast cancer. One hundred and twenty-three patients (greater than 2 cycles) were evaluated: 61 on the CAP, and 62 on the CMFVP schedule. An objective response (CR + PR) to CAP combination chemotherapy was achieved in 72% of patients (43/61), with a high rate (36%) of complete remissions. In terms of metastatic site, the response rate appeared to be particularly high in soft tissue and visceral organ (lung, liver) metastases. In the CMFVP group, an objective response was noted in 26 of 62 patients (42%), with 16% complete remissions. The difference in overall therapeutic response - and in the complete remission rate as well - was statistically significant to the advantage of the CAP regimen (P less than 0.01). The duration of remissions was 6-28 + months (means = 14) for the CAP, and 4-15 + months (mean = 9) for the CMFVP schedule. Toxic side effects were more pronounced in the CAP group, particularly myelosuppression, with anemia prevailing. Side effects of CMFVP treatment were moderate. In 39 CMFVP previously treated cases, CAP was administered as second-line treatment, and an objective response was observed in 51% of cases (20/39). Results of this controlled trial showed the advantage of the CAP combination chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Fifty-one patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomly allocated to receive either a four drug combination consisting of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP), or a combination of vincristine, Adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) with cross-over on relapse. Objective responses were seen in 17 of 26 patients (65%) in the CMFP group and in 14 of 25 patients (56%) in the VAC group, but this difference was not statistically significant. The median duration of response for each group was one year. The estimated median survival was greater for the CMFP group, but this was not significant. Toxicity was more severe with the VAC regimen. It is concluded that there is no therapeutic advantage of the VAC over the CMFP regimen. A randomized trial of Adriamycin (A) in combination with melphalan (M), (MA therapy), and in combination with M plus cyclophosphamide (C) (MAC therapy), was initiated in 40 evaluable patients with metastatic breast cancer. Twenty-two patients demonstrated an objective response to therapy: 9/20 to the MA regimen, and 13/20 to the MAC regimen. For the 22 responders, median duration of response is not yet achieved for either complete or partial responders, at 10 and 9 months, respectively. The addition of the two alkylating agents to Adriamycin was superior to the single alkylating agent addition, both in total response rate and in completeness of response. Maintenance therapy, after achieving the maximum cumulative dose of Adriamycin, was provided by cyclophosphamide plus methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). In 19 patients completing induction and entering maintenance therapy, only one relapse has developed with maximun follow-up at 15 months. Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate, was designed to generate 5-fluorouracil preferentially at the tumour site. This randomised, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of capecitabine or paclitaxel in patients with anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Outpatients with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer whose disease was unresponsive or resistant to anthracycline therapy were randomised to 3-week cycles of intermittent oral capecitabine (1255 mg m(-2) twice daily, days 1-14, (22 patients)) or a reference arm of i.v. paclitaxel (175 mg m(-2), (20 patients)). Two additional patients were initially randomised to continuous capecitabine 666 mg m(-2) twice daily, but this arm was closed following selection of the intermittent schedule for further development. Overall response rate was 36% (95% CI 17-59%) with capecitabine (including three complete responses) and 26% (95% CI 9-51%) with paclitaxel (no complete responses). Median time to disease progression was similar in the two treatment groups (3.0 months with capecitabine, 3.1 months with paclitaxel), as was overall survival (7.6 and 9.4 months, respectively). Paclitaxel was associated with more alopecia, peripheral neuropathy, myalgia and neutropenia, whereas typical capecitabine-related adverse events were diarrhoea, vomiting and hand-foot syndrome. Twenty-three per cent of capecitabine-treated patients and 16% of paclitaxel-treated patients achieved a > or =10% improvement in Karnofsky Performance Status. Oral capecitabine is active in anthracycline-pretreated advanced/metastatic breast cancer and has a favourable safety profile. Furthermore, capecitabine provides a convenient, patient-orientated therapy.
                Copyright 2002 Cancer Research UK Based on favorable results we reported earlier with the CAP regimen in breast cancer (CAP vs CMFVP), the present study compared the CAP with the FAC regimen, which is so far one of the most active adriamycin containing chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer. The aim of the study was to find the optimal first line treatment and possibly evaluate the role of cis platinum in breast cancer chemotherapy. The CAP schedule consisted of cyclophosphamide 200 mg/m2 i.v. days 1, 3 and 5, adriamycin 40 mg/m2 i.v. day 1, and platinum 30 mg/m2 i.v. day 1, 3 and 5. The FAC schedule included 5-FU 500 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, adriamycin 50 mg/m2 day 1, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 day 1. One hundred and twenty-six previously untreated patients received greater than 2 cycles and were evaluated. In the CAP arm 15 complete (26%) and 24 partial remissions were observed, resulting in a 67% overall response rate (39/58). The response in soft tissue and visceral organs was notable (78% - 22/28, 71% - 15/21) with an important complete response rate (32%). In the FAC arm there was an overall response in 41% (28/68) of patients, with 8 complete (12%) and 20 partial responses. The difference in overall response, complete response, and response in soft tissue and visceral organs, was statistically significant in favor of the CAP arm (P less than 0.005). Concerning bone metastases there was no difference between the two schedules in response rate, nor in the median remission duration (CAP 11, FAC 10 months). In spite of a somewhat longer median survival in the CAP group, the difference (13 months vs 9 months) was not statistically significant (P = 0.10). Toxicity was moderate and tolerable in both regimens with more pronounced myelosuppression and vomiting in the CAP group. Compared with the FAC schedule the platinum containing combination chemotherapy (CAP) showed higher antitumor activity with no reflection on remission duration and survival. This phase III study compared docetaxel with mitomycin plus vinblastine (MV) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy.
                Patients (n=392) were randomized to receive either docetaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks (n=203) or mitomycin 12 mg/m2 i.v. every 6 weeks plus vinblastine 6 mg/m2 i.v. every 3 weeks (n=189), for a maximum of 10 3-week cycles.
                In an intention-to-treat analysis, docetaxel produced significantly higher response rates than MV overall (30.0% v 11.6%; P < .0001), as well as in patients with visceral involvement (30% v 11%), liver metastases (33% v 7%), or resistance to previous anthracycline agents (30% v 7%). Median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival were significantly longer with docetaxel than MV (19 v 1 weeks, P=.001, and 1 1.4 v 8.7 months, P=.0097, respectively). Neutropenia grade 3/4 was more frequent with docetaxel (93.1 % v62.5%; P < .05); thrombocytopenia grade 3/4 was more frequent with MV (12.0% v 4.1%; P < .05). Severe acute or chronic nonhematologic adverse events were infrequent in both groups. Withdrawal rates because of adverse events (MV, 10.1%; docetaxel, 13.8%) or toxic death (MV, 1.6%; docetaxel, 2.0%) were similar in both groups. Quality-of-life analysis was limited by a number of factors, but results were similar in both groups.
                Docetaxel is significantly superior to MV in terms of response, TTP, and survival. The safety profiles of both therapies are manageable and tolerable. Docetaxel represents a clear treatment option for patients with MBC progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. In 126 postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, four chemotherapeutic combination programs were tested. Patients were stratified and randomized to one of the four programs: (1) fluorouracil, cytoxan and prednisone (CFP): (2) fluorouracil, cytoxan and Adriamycin (CAF); (3) cytoxan and Adriamycin (CA); or (4) alternating combinations of CFP-CA. Objective response rates were 17% for 18 patients on CFP, 25% for 40 patients on CAF, 42% for 41 patients on CA and 63% for 19 patients on CFP-CA. CFP-CA provided a significantly higher response rate than either CFP or CAF. The response rate of CA was intermediate. The duration of remission and survival were similar for all four groups. When progression or relapse following remission was demonstrated, patients were rerandomized to either adrenalectomy or tamoxifen. There were no responders either in the 15 patients undergoing adrenalectomy or the 11 patients receiving tamoxifen. In a crossover study, nine adrenalectomized patients received tamoxifen and four tamoxifen-treated patients underwent adrenalectomy. None responded. It appears that response rates to hormonal modalities are reduced in patients previously treated by combination chemotherapy. We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate primarily the cardioprotective effect of dexrazoxane (DEX) in patients with advanced breast cancer and soft tissue sarcomas (STS) treated with high-dose epirubicin (EPI). We wished also to determine the value of radioimmunoscintigraphy (RIS) in the assessment of anthracycline cardiotoxicity.
                Patients with breast cancer (n = 95) or STS (n = 34) received EPI 160 mg/m2 by intravenous (I.V.) bolus every 3 weeks with or without DEX 1,000 mg/m2 I.V. Cardiac monitoring included multigated radionuclide (MUGA) scans with determination of resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and RIS with indium 111 antimyosin monoclonal antibodies.
                In either disease, antitumor response rates, time to progression, and survival did not significantly differ between the two arms. There was little difference in noncardiac toxicity for the two treatment groups. All methods of cardiac evaluation clearly documented the cardioprotective effect of DEX. Four patients developed congestive heart failure (CHF), all in the EPI arm. The decrease in LVEF from baseline was significantly greater in the control group. An abnormal antimyosin uptake was observed early in both arms and progressively increased during treatment. However, this increase was significantly higher in the EPI group (P = .004).
                DEX significantly protects against the development of cardiotoxicity when high single doses of EPI are used. Apparently, there was no evidence of an adverse impact of DEX on antitumor activity. Although RIS is a sensitive technique in detecting anthracycline cardiac damage, its specificity is low and it cannot be considered a primary test for guiding anthracycline treatment. A total of 306 patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were randomized to receive chemotherapy in a sequential or alternating mode. Sequential chemotherapy consisted of eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin (doxorubicin), and vincristine (CAV) and alternating chemotherapy consisted of three cycles (1, 3, 5) of etoposide, vindesine, and ifosfamide (EVI); three cycles (2, 4, 6) of cisplatin, Adriamycin, and vincristine (PAV); and two cycles (7, 8) of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and CCNU (CMC). Responsive patients received prophylactic cranial irradiation after three cycles and chest irradiation after eight cycles of chemotherapy. No maintenance therapy was applied to patients achieving complete remission. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Of the 302 patients evaluable, overall response rate was 59% in the sequential arm and 70% in the alternating arm. Patients treated with CAV had a complete response rate of 21% in contrast to 36% for those receiving alternating therapy. The median survival for all patients was 9.8 versus 11.3 months, for limited disease 11.1 versus 13.4 months, and for extensive disease 8.9 versus 9.9 months, all in favor of the alternating treatment. Two-year survival rate for all patients was 6% versus 9%, for limited disease 11% versus 14%, and for extensive disease 3% versus 6%, all preferring the alternating treatment mode. Progression-free survival demonstrated a strong correlation to the extent of response irrespective of the treatment regimen applied. Toxicity included 11 lethal and 8 life-threatening complications with a higher frequency in the alternating treatment arm. These results suggest that alternating treatment of SCLC with different drug combinations is more effective than sequential application of CAV. This phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) to 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer.
                A total of 267 women with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive either AT (doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) followed 24 hours later by paclitaxel 220 mg/m(2)) or FAC (5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2)), each administered every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. Patients had to have measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2. Only one prior non-anthracycline, nontaxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy regimen was allowed.
                Overall response rates for patients randomized to AT and FAC were 68% and 55%, respectively (P =.032). Median time to progression and overall survival were significantly longer for AT compared with FAC (time to progression 8.3 months v 6.2 months [P =.034]; overall survival 23.3 months v 18.3 months [P =.013]). Therapy was generally well-tolerated (median of eight cycles delivered in each arm). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more common with AT than with FAC (89% v 65%; P <.001); however, the incidence of fever and infection was low. Grade 3 or 4 arthralgia and myalgia, peripheral neuropathy, and diarrhea were more common with AT, whereas nausea and vomiting were more common with FAC. The incidence of cardiotoxicity was low in both arms.
                AT conferred a significant advantage in response rate, time to progression, and overall survival compared with FAC. Treatment was well-tolerated with no unexpected toxicities. This phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BV) when combined with several standard chemotherapy regimens versus those regimens alone for first-line treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer.
                Patients were randomly assigned in 2:1 ratio to chemotherapy plus BV or chemotherapy plus placebo. Before random assignment, investigators chose capecitabine (Cape; 2,000 mg/m(2) for 14 days), taxane (Tax) -based (nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2), docetaxel 75 or 100 mg/m(2)), or anthracycline (Anthra) -based (doxorubicin or epirubicin combinations [doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, or fluorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide]) chemotherapy administered every 3 weeks. BV or placebo was administered at 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), 1-year survival rate, objective response rate, duration of objective response, and safety. Two independently powered cohorts defined by the choice of chemotherapy (Cape patients or pooled Tax/Anthra patients) were analyzed in parallel.
                RIBBON-1 (Regimens in Bevacizumab for Breast Oncology) enrolled 1,237 patients (Cape cohort, n = 615; Tax/Anthra cohort, n = 622). Median PFS was longer for each BV combination (Cape cohort: increased from 5.7 months to 8.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; log-rank P < .001; and Tax/Anthra cohort: increased from 8.0 months to 9.2 months; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.80; log-rank P < .001). No statistically significant differences in OS between the placebo- and BV-containing arms were observed. Safety was consistent with results of prior BV trials.
                The combination of BV with Cape, Tax, or Anthra improves clinical benefit in terms of increased PFS in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer, with a safety profile comparable to prior phase III studies. A multi-institutional randomized clinical trial was carried out to evaluate the effect of vincristine (V) added to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP) for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. There were 427 patients entered into the study and randomly assigned to one of the two treatments, i.e. the five drug therapy CMFPV or the four drug therapy CMFP. The differences in patient survival and tumor response between the two treatment groups were not statistically significant. The data were also analyzed using multivariate procedures to determine those factors ascertained at entry into the study which were predictors of survival or predictors of response to therapy. The one factor that predicted both response and survival was performance status. An additional important predictor of survival was sites of metastatic involvement. Other significant predictors of response were menopausal age, BUN, and hematocrit. The predictive value of estrogen receptor (ER) level for response to chemotherapy was studied in 182 patients with metastatic breast cancer in a prospective study. Patients were stratified according to ER status and dominant site of disease and randomized to one of three regimens: cyclophosphamide, 5-Fluorouracil, and prednisone (CFP) versus CFP, methotrexate, and vincristine (CFPMV) versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). There was no significant differences in all response categories (P = 0.21), was taken as a predictor for response to chemotherapy, there was no significant difference in overall response (P = 0.61) between ER+ (62/108, 57%) and ER- patients (31/49, 63%). However, there was a significant trend toward a higher degree of response in ER- patients (more complete response [CR] nine of 49, 18%, and fewer failures six of 49, 12%) than in ER+ (less CR seven of 108, 7%, and more failures 37/108, 34%) (P = 0.006). Patients with higher measured levels of ER showed worse response (Kendall's tau C, P = 0.026). This trend for ER- patients to have better response than ER+ patients was generally consistent, regardless of the predominant site of metastases or chemotherapy regimen (P = 0.04 for CFP; P = 0.08 for CFPMV; and P = 0.20 for AC). The advantage of a better response for ER- patients was nullified by an earlier relapse which was reflected in longer duration of remission, time to treatment failure, and survival in favor of ER+ patients (12.3 months versus 7.3 months remission duration, 18.7 months versus 13.6 months survival in partial responders). These data suggest that ER- patients respond to a higher extent to chemotherapy but relapse sooner than ER+ patients, suggesting a more rapid growth for ER- tumors. In patients with ER- tumors and poorer prognosis on conventional chemotherapy, new trials of intensive consolidation after response should be considered. The purpose of this study was to assess whether a short course of anthracycline containing chemotherapy followed by high dose therapy with autologous stem-cell support improves disease-free and overall survival as compared with conventional, anthracycline containing chemotherapy, in patients with primary breast cancer and four or more histologically involved lymph nodes.
                Two hundred and eighty one patients entered into a randomised clinical trial were allocated to receive standard, conventional treatment (5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide-FEC for six cycles) or FEC for three cycles followed by high dose therapy consisting of cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin and stem cell rescue (HDT). To be eligible, patients had to be free of overt metastatic disease and be < or =60 years of age. Analyses were according to intention to treat.
                At a median follow up of 68 months, 118 patients have experienced a relapse or death from breast cancer (62 in the FEC followed by HDT arm and 56 in the conventional FEC arm) and a total of 100 patients have died (54 in the FEC followed by HDT arm and 46 in the conventional FEC arm). No significant difference was observed in relapse-free survival [hazard ratio 1.06, 95% CI 0.74-1.52, p = 0.76] or overall survival [hazard ratio 1.18, 95% CI 0.80-1.75, p = 0.40]. Five patients died from treatment related causes, three as a consequence of HDT and two in the conventional FEC arm.
                At the present time, no benefit has been observed from replacing three cycles of conventional chemotherapy with the HDT regimen described here. Patients should continue to receive conventional chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Seventy-eight advanced breast cancer patients with hormone-resistant disease or visceral metastases were randomized to receive either of two low dose regimens consisting of cyclophosphamide (C), methotrexate (M), 5-fluorouracil (F), and Adriamycin (A) as their initial chemotherapy. One group was treated with CAMF, and the other with CMF until progression, followed by A (CMF leads to A). C was given at 50 mg/m2, po, days 1-14; M at 20 mg/m2, F at 300 mg/m2, and A at 20 mg/m2, iv, days 1 and 8 of each 28-day cycle. The response rates for CAMF vs. CMF did not differ significantly (complete and partial responses-62% vs. 49%; stabilizations-23% vs. 31%). Responses by site of metasis, median times to progression and median survivals were similar for both groups. Poor and good risk partial responders had similar survivals. Twelve percent of CMF patients treated with Adriamycin at the time of progression had partial responses with an associated improved survival. Since CMF is as effective as CAMF, but has less toxicity, low dose therapy with CMF is more acceptable than CAMF as an initial chemotherapy regimen for metastatic breast cancer. Adriamycin may be reserved for subsequent regression induction. We report the results of a randomized trial carried out by the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and in which 230 patients with advanced breast cancer receiving concurrently a hormonal treatment (oophorectomy for pre- and tamoxifen for postmenopausal women) were randomly allocated to three different regimens of combination chemotherapy. The therapeutic results registered with the two more intensive combinations (LMP/FVP and LMFP/ADM) were similar with regard to response rates, time to progression and survival. The patients receiving the low-dose chemotherapy lmfp showed a statistically significant lower response rate (32%, P less than 0.001) and a shorter survival (P = 0.03) than the results observed in patients treated with the two other regimens. This difference was particularly pronounced, at least regarding survival, in the following subgroups: postmenopausal women, patients with a poor performance status, dominant visceral lesions, two sites of disease and a disease-free interval longer than 12 months. Patients with bony metastases as dominant lesion fared similarly with all three regimens of chemotherapy. This latter subset of advanced breast cancer patients should probably be spared too intensive cytotoxic treatment. This is, to our knowledge, the first report of a randomized trial showing an evident correlation between response rate and survival in various subgroups of patients with advanced breast cancer treated with different chemotherapeutic regimens. This multicentre, randomised phase III study compared docetaxel with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine in patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure of neo/adjuvant or one line of palliative anthracycline-based chemotherapy. One hundred and seventy-six metastatic breast cancer patients were randomised to receive docetaxel (100 mg m(-2)) every 3 weeks or 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine: 5-fluorouracil (750 mg m(-2) per day continuous infusion) D1-5 plus vinorelbine (25 mg m(-2)) D1 and D5 of each 3-week cycle. Eighty-six patients received 516 cycles of docetaxel; 90 patients received 476 cycles of 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. Median time to progression (6.5 vs 5.1 months) and overall survival (16.0 vs 15.0 months) did not differ significantly between the docetaxel and 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine arms, respectively. Six (7%) complete responses and 31 (36%) partial responses occurred with docetaxel (overall response rate 43%, 95% confidence interval: 32-53%), while 4 (4.4%) complete responses and 31 (34.4%) partial responses occurred with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine (overall response rate 38.8%, 95% confidence interval: 29-49%). Main grade 3-4 toxicities were (docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine): neutropenia 82% vs 67%; stomatitis 5% vs 40%; febrile neutropenia 13% vs 22%; and infection 2% vs 7%. There was one possible treatment-related death in the docetaxel arm and five with 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine. In anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients, docetaxel showed comparable efficacy to 5-fluorouracil+vinorelbine, but was less toxic. A prospective randomized trial was conducted comparing the clinical response of 60 patients with advanced breast cancer to a combination of adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, and oral ftorafur (ACF), or to a combination of ACF plus methotrexate (ACFM). The response rate was 12 of 28 (43%) in ACF and 18 of 30 (60%) in ACFM. Responses were seen more frequently in patients in whom fewer than two organs were involved, and responses at dominant metastatic sites were equal for the two arms. The response duration was 21 + (3.5-49.5+) months with ACF, as against 6.9 (1.9-30.8+) months with ACFM (P less than 0.05). The median survival time from start of therapy was 20.8+ months for ACF, while that for ACFM was 13+ months (statistically not significant). The major toxicities were hair loss, GI toxicity, and leukopenia. The response rate with ACFM was higher than that with ACF, but the addition of methotrexate to ACF did not increase the complete response rate or prolong response duration. We assessed the efficacy of a regimen consisting of four cycles of cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin (Adria Laboratories, Inc, Columbus, Ohio), cisplatin (CAP) followed by maintenance with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone (CFP) compared with CFP alone in a randomized trial of 86 patients with advanced breast cancer. The objective regression rates were 46% (CFP) and 49% (CAP with CFP) which included complete regression rates of 7% (CFP) and 4% (CAP with CFP). The median time to progression was nine months for CFP and six months for CAP with CFP. Median survival in the CFP group was 18 months v 11 months in the CAP recipients. Due to the therapeutic trend in favor of patients receiving CFP, we terminated the study before achieving our initially projected accrual. We observed over a twofold excess of substantial nausea and vomiting among patients receiving the platinum-based regimen. In our view, the CAP followed by the CFP regimen is a more toxic program that offers no clinically meaningful improvement over CFP to patients with advanced breast cancer. Ninety-four patients were entered in a clinical trial assessing the clinical activity of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CAP) versus a combination of cyclophosphamide. 5-Fluorouracil, and prednisone (CFP) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Objective response rates were comparable, 49% for CFP and 46% for CAP. There was no statistical difference between the duration of response of the two regimens or in time to progression. Most importantly, survival differences were not apparent. Both regimens were clinically tolerable and toxicities, for the most part, were comparable. Thus, no therapeutic advantage existed for either of these polychemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced breast cancer. Two groups of 23 patients each, having advanced breast cancer, entered this prospective and randomized study. One group was treated with the conventional schedule of CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2/po from the first to the 14th day, methotrexate 40 mg/m2/iv the first and the 8th day, 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m2/iv the first and the 8th day), and the other was treated with a new six-drug regimen, administered at low doses (R 14: cyclophosphamide 2 mg/kg/iv, vincristine 0.01 mg/kg/iv, vinblastine 0.1 mg/kg/iv, the first day and 5-fluorouracil 5 mg/kg/iv, methotrexate 0.7 mg/kg/iv, adriamycin 0.5 mg/kg/iv the 2nd day every 21 days). The remission rate was 35% (8/23) and 39% (9/23) for CMF and R 14 respectively. The median duration of objective remission was 6 months for CMF and 5 months for R 14 regimen. The median survival time of responding patients was 18 months for CMF and 14 months for R 14. This study shows that the new six-drug regimen at low doses is effective (regarding subjective, objective response and survival rate), and its toxicity is no higher than that of CMF (the incidence of leukopenia was significantly lower during the first course). Therefore, R 14 should be considered an alternative regimen to CMF in the treatment of advanced and, possibly, early breast cancer. The advantages for using R 14 are: 1) it is less toxic (a single dose is a very small amount of medicine compared to what is usually administered), 2) an iv administration always follows a therapeutic program (while in a CMF schedule cyclophosphamide is self-administered by the patient). Adriamycin is of noteworthy efficacy in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Its role in combination regimens is under investigation. One hundred seventy-five women with advanced breast cancer were entered into a prospectively randomized trial comparing two five-drug regimens. Regimen CMFVP consisted of cyclophosphamide (C), methotrexate (M), 5-fluorouracil (F), vincristine (V), and prednisone (P). Regimen CAFVP was identical but substituted Adriamycin (A) for methotrexate. Twenty-seven patients were disqualified; 148 were evaluable. With CMFVP the complete response rate (CR) was 11%, and the partial response rate (PR) was 46%; with CAFVP, CR was 13% and PR was 45%. Duration of response tended to be slightly longer for patients on the Adriamycin arm. The median survival for CR and PR patients with CMFVP was 20.2 months, which was shorter (p = .07) than the 33 month median survival with CAFVP. Although statistical significance was not reached at the 5% level, the increased survival of responders on the Adriamycin regimen supports the data of other studies which suggest that first line combination chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer should include Adriamycin. A prospective randomized clinical trial was undertaken in 184 patients with metastatic breast carcinoma to compare single drug chemotherapy with L-phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM) and intermittent combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluourouracil (CMF). All patients had not been previously treated with cytotoxic drugs and all had objectively measurable visceral of soft tissue disease. Of the 93 patients who received CMF, 49 (53%) achieved a complete (14 patients) or partial (35 patients) regression of measurable tumor, for a median duration of 25 weeks. Eighteen of the 91 patients (20%) treated with L-PAM responded, for a median duration of 13 weeks. The toxicity was primarily hematologic, and greater in the CMF group, which also received more cycles of therapy because of the higher rate and duration of response. The overall survival of CMF-treated patients was superior to that of the single drug group. The differences were even greater when the patients were subclassified according to the presence of liver involvement or nonambulatory performance status. The superior antitumor effect of CMF over L-PAM suggests that it may be a more effective drug regimen to be used as an adjuvant to primary therapy. 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.
Compared to regimens without antitumour antibiotics, regimens that contained these agents showed a statistically significant advantage for tumour response and time to progression in women with metastatic breast cancer but were not associated with an improvement in overall survival. The favourable effect on tumour response and time to progression observed in anthracycline containing regimens was also associated with greater toxicity.