Randomized trial of 3 different regimens of combination chemotherapy in patients receiving simultaneously a hormonal treatment for advanced breast cancer. Combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: two regimens containing adriamycin. 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. Differential response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor level. Results of a prospective randomized study. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in endometrial cancer--results from two randomised studies. Response and survival in advanced breast cancer after two non-cross-resistant combinations. Survival of premenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Long-term follow-up of Eastern Cooperative Group and Cancer and Leukemia Group B studies. Combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. Prospective comparison of multiple drug therapy with L-phenylalanine mustard. 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. Safety and efficacy of using a single agent or a phase II agent before instituting standard combination chemotherapy in previously untreated metastatic breast cancer patients: report of a randomized study--Cancer and Leukemia Group B 8642. A phase III randomized study on the sequencing of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in the conservative management of early-stage breast cancer. Sequenced compared with simultaneous anthracycline and cyclophosphamide in high-risk stage I and II breast cancer: final analysis from INT-0137 (S9313). Randomized clinical trial of CFP versus CMFP in women with metastatic breast cancer. Multicycle dose-intensive chemotherapy for women with high-risk primary breast cancer: results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 15-95. Randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy and blood cell autografts for high-risk primary breast carcinoma. Hormonal treatment for metastatic breast cancer. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Phase III trial comparing aminoglutethimide to tamoxifen.
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. 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. 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. 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. Endometrial cancer patients with high grade tumours, deep myometrial invasion or advanced stage disease have a poor prognosis. Randomised studies have demonstrated the prevention of loco-regional relapses with radiotherapy (RT) with no effect on overall survival (OS). The possible additive effect of chemotherapy (CT) remains unclear. Two randomised clinical trials (NSGO-EC-9501/EORTC-55991 and MaNGO ILIADE-III) were undertaken to clarify if sequential combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in high-risk endometrial cancer. The two studies were pooled.
                Patients (n=540; 534 evaluable) with operated endometrial cancer International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (FIGO) stage I-III with no residual tumour and prognostic factors implying high-risk were randomly allocated to adjuvant radiotherapy with or without sequential chemotherapy.
                In the NSGO/EORTC study, the combined modality treatment was associated with 36% reduction in the risk for relapse or death (hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95%confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.99; P=0.04); two-sided tests were used. The result from the Gynaecologic Oncology group at the Mario Negri Institute (MaNGO)-study pointed in the same direction (HR 0.61), but was not significant. In the combined analysis, the estimate of risk for relapse or death was similar but with narrower confidence limits (HR 0.63, CI 0.44-0.89; P=0.009). Neither study showed significant differences in the overall survival. In the combined analysis, overall survival approached statistical significance (HR 0.69, CI 0.46-1.03; P=0.07) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was significant (HR 0.55, CI 0.35-0.88; P=0.01).
                Addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to radiation improves progression-free survival in operated endometrial cancer patients with no residual tumour and a high-risk profile. A remaining question for future studies is if addition of radiotherapy to chemotherapy improves the results.
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 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. 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. 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. 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. We undertook a prospective, randomized phase III trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using a phase II agent before initiating therapy with standard combination chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients.
                A total of 365 women with measurable metastatic breast cancer, previously untreated with chemotherapy for their metastatic disease, were randomized to receive either immediate chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) or up to four cycles of one of five sequential cohorts of single-agent drugs: trimetrexate, melphalan, amonafide, carboplatin, or elsamitrucin, followed by CAF.
                The toxicity of each single agent followed by CAF was comparable to that of CAF alone. The cumulative response rates for the single agent followed by CAF were not statistically different from those of CAF alone (44% v 52%; P = .24). However, in the multivariate analysis, patients with visceral disease had a trend toward lower response rates on the phase II agent plus CAF arm (P = .078). Although survival and response duration also were not statistically significantly different between the two study arms (P = .074 and P = .069, respectively), there was a suggestion of benefit for the CAF-only arm.
                The brief use of a phase II agent, regardless of its efficacy, followed by CAF resulted in response rates, toxicities, durations of response, and survival statistically equivalent to those seen with the use of CAF alone. These findings support the use of a new paradigm for the evaluation of phase II agents in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. To compare two different timings of radiation treatment in patients with breast cancer who underwent conservative surgery and were candidates to receive adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy.
                A total of 206 patients who had quadrantectomy and axillary dissection for breast cancer and were planned to receive adjuvant CMF chemotherapy were randomized to concurrent or sequential radiotherapy. Radiotherapy was delivered only to the whole breast through tangential fields to a dose of 50 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks, followed by an electron boost of 10-15 Gy in 4-6 fractions to the tumor bed.
                No differences in 5-year breast recurrence-free, metastasis-free, disease-free, and overall survival were observed in the two treatment groups. All patients completed the planned radiotherapy. No evidence of an increased risk of toxicity was observed between the two arms. No difference in radiotherapy and in the chemotherapy dose intensity was observed in the two groups.
                In patients with negative surgical margins receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy can be delayed to up to 7 months. Concurrent administration of CMF chemotherapy and radiotherapy is safe and might be reserved for patients at high risk of local recurrence, such as those with positive surgical margins or larger tumor diameters. 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. A randomized trial was performed to determine relative efficacy and toxicity of two first-line combination chemotherapy regimens in women with metastatic breast cancer: CFP (cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone) and CMFP (cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, prednisone). Both regimens have reported efficacy in this setting but differ in dosages and scheduling of the agents they have in common. Three hundred thirty-six women with no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were eligible and evaluable, and 309 had either measurable or evaluable disease and were assessable for objective response. Responses were seen in 65 of 153 (42%) on CFP and 83 of 156 (53%) on CMFP (two-sided P = 0.06). Median durations of response were 7.1 months for CFP and 8.5 months for CMFP (log-rank, two-sided P = 0.67). Considering all 336 patients, the median times to disease progression were 4.7 months for CFP and 6.2 months for CMFP (log-rank P = 0.31) and median survivals were 15.2 and 14.9 months, respectively (log-rank P = 0.88). Covariate analysis did not alter these findings. Median leukocyte nadirs were 1800 for CFP and 1500 for CMFP, with 22% and 21%, respectively, having nadirs less than 1000/microliters. Emesis was more frequent on CFP (49%) than on CMFP (26%) but was severe in only 7% and 5%, respectively. It is concluded that despite a higher response rate on CMFP and some differences in toxicities including a higher reported incidence of emesis on CFP, there was no substantial difference in efficacy or tolerability between the two regimens. 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. Uncontrolled studies have reported encouraging outcomes for patients with high-risk primary breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell support. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare standard-dose chemotherapy with the same therapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy. PATIENTS and
                Patients with 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes after primary breast surgery or patients with four or more positive lymph nodes after four cycles of primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy were eligible. All patients were to receive eight cycles of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), and cyclophosphamide (FAC). Patients were stratified by stage and randomly assigned to receive two cycles of high-dose cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin with autologous hematopoietic stem cell support or no additional chemotherapy. Tamoxifen was planned for postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors and chest wall radiotherapy was planned for all. All P values are from two-sided tests.
                Seventy-eight patients (48 after primary surgery and 30 after primary chemotherapy) were registered. Thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned to FAC and 39 to FAC followed by high-dose chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, there have been 41 relapses. In intention-to-treat analyses, estimated 3-year relapse-free survival rates were 62% and 48% for FAC and FAC/high-dose chemotherapy, respectively (P =.35), and 3-year survival rates were 77% and 58%, respectively (P =.23). Overall, there was greater and more frequent morbidity associated with high-dose chemotherapy than with FAC; there was one septic death associated with high-dose chemotherapy.
                No relapse-free or overall survival advantage was associated with the use of high-dose chemotherapy, and morbidity was increased with its use. Thus, high-dose chemotherapy is not indicated outside a clinical trial. 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.
The addition of one or more drugs to the regimen shows a statistically significant advantage for tumour response in women with metastatic breast cancer but the results suggest no difference in survival time or time to progression. The positive effect on tumour response was also associated with increased toxicity.