| 1. |
- Jerusalem, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Continuous versus intermittent extended adjuvant letrozole for breast cancer: Final results of randomized phase 3 SOLE (Study of Letrozole Extension) and SOLE Estrogen Substudy.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534. ; 32:10, s. 1256-1266
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Late recurrences in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers remain an important challenge. Avoidance or delayed development of resistance represents the main objective in extended endocrine therapy. In animal models, resistance was reversed with restoration of circulating estrogen level during interruption of letrozole treatment. This phase 3 randomized, open-label Study of Letrozole Extension (SOLE) studied the effect of extended intermittent letrozole treatment in comparison with continuous letrozole. In parallel, the SOLE estrogen sub-study (SOLE-EST) analyzed the level of estrogen during the interruption of treatment.SOLE enrolled 4884 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, lymph node-positive, operable breast cancer between December 2007 and October 2012 and among them, 104 patients were enrolled in SOLE-EST. They must have undergone local treatment and have completed 4-6 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Patients were randomized between continuous letrozole (2.5 mg/day orally for 5 years) and intermittent letrozole treatment (2.5 mg/day during 9 months followed by a 3-month interruption in years 1-4 and then 2.5 mg/day during all year 5).Intention-to-treat population included 4851 women in SOLE (n=2425 in intermittent and n=2426 in continuous letrozole groups) and 103 women in SOLE-EST (n=78 in intermittent and n=25 in continuous letrozole groups). After a median follow-up of 84 months, 7-year disease-free survival was 81.4% in intermittent group and 81.5% in continuous group (hazard ratio: 1.03, 95%CI: 0.91-1.17). Reported adverse events were similar in both groups. Circulating estrogen recovery was demonstrated within 6 weeks after the stop of letrozole treatment.Extended adjuvant endocrine therapy by intermittent administration of letrozole did not improve disease-free survival compared to continuous use despite the recovery of circulating estrogen level. The similar disease-free survival coupled with previously reported quality-of-life advantages suggest intermittent extended treatment is a valid option for patients who require or prefer a treatment interruption.
|
|
| 2. |
- Aebi, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Differential efficacy of three cycles of CMF followed by tamoxifen in patients with ER-positive and ER-negative tumors: Long-term follow up on IBCSG Trial IX
- 2011
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY. - 0923-7534. ; 22:9, s. 1981-1987
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Abstract: Background: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor (ER)positive lymph node-negative breast cancer is being reassessed. Patients and methods: After stratification by ER status, 1669 postmenopausal patients with operable lymph nodenegative breast cancer were randomly assigned to three 28-day courses of 'classical' CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy followed by tamoxifen for 57 months (CMF/tamoxifen) or to tamoxifen alone for 5 years. Results: ERs were positive in 81% of tumors. At a median follow-up of 13.1 years, patients with ER-positive breast cancers did not benefit from CMF [13-year disease-free survival (DFS) 64% CMF/tamoxifen, 66% tamoxifen; P = 0.99], whereas CMF substantially improved the prognosis of patients with ER-negative breast cancer (13-year DFS 73% versus 57%, P = 0.001). Similarly, breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) was identical in the ER-positive cohort but significantly improved by chemotherapy in the ER-negative cohort (13-year BCFI 80% versus 63%, P = 0.001). CMF had no influence on second nonbreast malignancies or deaths from other causes. Conclusion: CMF is not beneficial in postmenopausal patients with node-negative ER-positive breast cancer but is highly effective within the ER-negative cohort. In the future, other markers of chemotherapy response may define a subset of patients with ER-positive tumors who may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.
|
|
| 3. |
- Gruber, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Extracapsular tumor spread and the risk of local, axillary and supraclavicular recurrence in node-positive, premenopausal patients with breast cancer.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology / ESMO. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041. ; 19:8, s. 1393-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Extracapsular tumor spread (ECS) has been identified as a possible risk factor for breast cancer recurrence, but controversy exists regarding its role in decision making for regional radiotherapy. This study evaluates ECS as a predictor of local, axillary, and supraclavicular recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI accrued 1475 eligible pre- and perimenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive three to nine courses of classical combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. ECS status was determined retrospectively in 933 patients based on review of pathology reports. Cumulative incidence and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using methods for competing risks analysis. Adjustment factors included treatment group and baseline patient and tumor characteristics. The median follow-up was 14 years. RESULTS: In univariable analysis, ECS was significantly associated with supraclavicular recurrence (HR = 1.96; 95% confidence interval 1.23-3.13; P = 0.005). HRs for local and axillary recurrence were 1.38 (P = 0.06) and 1.81 (P = 0.11), respectively. Following adjustment for number of lymph node metastases and other baseline prognostic factors, ECS was not significantly associated with any of the three recurrence types studied. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the decision for additional regional radiotherapy should not be based solely on the presence of ECS.
|
|
