Toxicity Analysis in the ADEBAR Trial: Sequential Anthracycline-Taxane Therapy Compared with FEC120 for the Adjuvant Treatment of High-Risk Breast Cancer

Background: Data from meta-analyses have shown taxane-containing therapies to be superior to anthracycline-based treatments for high-risk breast cancer. Patients and Methods: The ADEBAR trial was a multicenter phase Ill trial in which patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer were prospectively randomized for either sequential anthracycline-taxane or FEC120 therapy. Patients received 4x epirubicin (90 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks (q3w), followed by 4x docetaxel (100 mg/m(2)) q3w (EC-Doc arm), or 6x epirubicin (60 mg/m(2)) and 5-fluorouracil (500 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 and cyclophosphamide (75 mg/m(2)) on days 1-14, q4w (FEC arm). We compared both arms with respect to toxicity and feasibility. Results: Hematological toxicity was found significantly more often in the FEC arm. Febrile neutropenia was seen in 11.3% of patients in the FEC arm and in 8.4% of patients in the EC-Doc arm (p = 0.027). Non-hematological side effects of grade 3/4 were rarely seen in either arm. Therapy was terminated due to toxicity in 3.7% of the patients in the EC-Doc arm and in 8.0% of the patients in the FEC arm (p = 0.0009). Conclusion: The sequential anthracycline-taxane regimen is a well-tolerated and feasible alternative to FEC120 therapy

Role of gemcitabine in the treatment of advanced and metastatic breast cancer

Gemcitabine is an antimetabolite drug with proven antitumor activity and tolerability in metastatic breast cancer. In a total of nine studies, gemcitabine monotherapy has reached response rates of up to 37% in the first-line setting, 26% in the second-line setting, and 18% or better in the third-line setting. Gemcitabine is an excellent choice for combination therapy by its unique mechanism of action and favorable toxicity profile, thus limiting the risk of pretreatment-related drug resistance and overlapping toxicity, and by its potential for synergistic interaction with some combination partners as indicated in preclinical studies. Numerous phase II clinical studies have combined gemcitabine with other active agents such as the taxanes, vinorelbine, vindesine, cisplatin, 5-fluoro-uracil, as well as anthracyclines across various regimens and conditions of pretreatment. Most of these two-drug combinations have consistently demonstrated higher efficacy than either single agent, particularly in pretreated patients. Even higher efficacy has been obtained with triple-drug regimens including gemcitabine, anthracyclines (epirubicin or doxorubicin), and paclitaxel; these regimens have yielded overall response rates of 58-92% as first-line treatment. In view of these results, gemcitabine may be regarded as a valuable alternative to the palliative treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and an excellent option for the development of effective combination treatment not only in first-line therapy, but also for intensively pretreated patients previously exposed to anthracyclines and/or the taxanes. Copyright (C) 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase III Study of Weekly versus Standard Docetaxel plus Doxorubicin (D4) for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose: Previous phase II studies have indicated a greatly reduced hematotoxicity of docetaxel-based regimens administered on weekly schedules. The present trial was initiated to compare the toxicity and efficacy of weekly docetaxel versus its standard 3-weekly application in combination with doxorubicin. Methods: Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease were recruited. Inclusion criteria were age = grade 3 was observed in the standard arm of the D4 study compared to the weekly schedule (per-patient analysis: 61.9% q3w vs. 65.1% q1w; p > 0.05). Grade 3 and grade 4 fever, diarrhea, and infections occurred more frequently in the standard arm, whereas neurotoxicity and skin/nail disorders were observed more frequently in the weekly arm. Except for fever, none of these differences reached a level of significance. Dose delays, dose reductions, and the rate of omitted doses were increased in the weekly arm. The overall response rate was 44.2% in the weekly arm compared to 52.4% in the standard arm (p = 0.52). Time to progression was 6.2 (q1w) versus 10.3 (q3w) months (p = 0.36), and overall survival was 20.5 (q1w) versus 28.7 (q3w) months (p = 0.98). Conclusion: The present data support the feasibility of both weekly and 3-weekly application of docetaxel in combination with doxorubicin. Nevertheless, given that leukopenia was similar in both arms and the efficacy parameters were at least numerically inferior with the weekly schedule, standard 3-weekly application seems to be preferable for patients requiring combination chemotherapy. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Base

Epirubicin With Cyclophosphamide Followed by Docetaxel With Trastuzumab and Bevacizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy for HER2-Positive Locally Advanced Breast Cancer or as Adjuvant Therapy for HER2-Positive Pathologic Stage III Breast Cancer: A Phase II Trial of the NSABP Foundation Research Group, FB-5

Background The purpose of this study was to determine the cardiac safety and clinical activity of trastuzumab and bevacizumab with docetaxel after epirubicin with cyclophosphamide (EC) in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or pathologic stage 3 breast cancer (PS3BC). Patients and Methods Patients received every 3 week treatment with 4 cycles of EC (90/600 mg/m2) followed by 4 cycles of docetaxel (100 mg/m2). Targeted therapy with standard-dose trastuzumab with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg was given for a total of 1 year. Coprimary end points were (1) rate of cardiac events (CEs) in all patients defined as clinical congestive heart failure with a significant decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction or cardiac deaths; and (2) pathologic complete response (pCR) in breast and nodes in the neoadjuvant cohort. An independent cardiac review panel determined whether criteria for a CE were met. Results A total of 105 patients were accrued, 76 with LABC treated with neoadjuvant therapy and 29 with PS3BC treated with adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up was 59.2 months. Among 99 evaluable patients for cardiac safety, 4 (4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1%-10.0%) met CE criteria. The pCR percentage in LABC patients was 46% (95% CI, 34%-59%). Five-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients was 79.9% and 90.8%, respectively. Conclusion The regimen met predefined criteria for activity of interest with an acceptable rate of CEs. Although the pCR percentage was comparable with chemotherapy regimens with trastuzumab alone the high RFS and OS are of interest in these high-risk populations

Repurposing metformin for cancer treatment: current clinical studies.

In recent years, several studies have presented evidence suggesting a potential role for metformin in anti-cancer therapy. Preclinical studies have demonstrated several anticancer molecular mechanisms of metformin including mTOR inhibition, cytotoxic effects, and immunomodulation. Epidemiologic data have demonstrated decreased cancer incidence and mortality in patients taking metformin. Several clinical trials, focused on evaluation of metformin as an anti-cancer agent are presently underway. Data published from a small number of completed trials has put forth intriguing results. Clinical trials in pre-surgical endometrial cancer patients exhibited a significant decrease in Ki67 with metformin monotherapy. Another interesting observation was made in patients with breast cancer, wherein a trend towards improvement in cancer proliferation markers was noted in patients without insulin resistance. Data on survival outcomes with the use of metformin as an anti-cancer agent is awaited. This manuscript will critically review the role of metformin as a potential cancer treatment

Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase III Study of Weekly versus Standard Docetaxel (D2) for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose: Previous phase II studies have indicated a greatly reduced hematotoxicity of docetaxel-based regimens administered on weekly schedules. The present trial was initiated to randomly compare the toxicity and efficacy of weekly docetaxel versus its standard 3-weekly application. Methods: Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease were recruited. Patients aged >60 years or with a Karnofsky Perfomance Status (KPS) of 60-80% were eligible for the D2 study. Patients were randomized to receive docetaxel either on a 3-weekly {[}75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (q3w)] or on a weekly (30 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15; q4w) schedule. Treatment was continued until a maximum of 8 cycles, unacceptable toxicity, or disease progression. All patients received standard corticosteroid prophylaxis. Results: Since statistical significance for the primary endpoint (toxicity) was achieved in the interim analysis, the study was closed according to the study protocol (102 of 162 patients). Compared to the standard arm, leukopenia >= grade 3 was a rare event in the weekly arm of the D2 study (per-patient analysis: 4.2% q1w vs. 51.9% q3w; p < 0.0001). No difference was observed between the 2 schedules regarding the occurrence of anemia or thrombocytopenia. With regard to non-hematological toxicity, there was a higher incidence of skin/nail and hepatological toxicity with the weekly schedule, whereas neurotoxicity was observed more often in the standard arm. The rate of omitted doses was significantly increased in the weekly arm (8.6% q1w vs. 0% q3w). The overall response rate was 22.9% in the weekly arm compared to 42.6% in the standard arm (p = 0.039). Time to progression was 5.4 (q1w) versus 6.3 (q3w) months (p = 0.91), and overall survival was 22.7 (q1w) versus 15.8 (q3w) months (p = 0.24). Conclusion: The present data support the feasibility of both weekly and 3-weekly application of docetaxel. As expected, severe leukopenia seems avoidable in weekly scheduled single-agent docetaxel and may serve as an important treatment option, particularly in elderly patients and patients with a reduced performance status. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Base

Pregnancy-associated breast cancer - Special features in diagnosis and treatment

For obvious psychological reasons it is difficult to associate pregnancy - a life-giving period of our existence with life-threatening malignancies. Symptoms pointing to malignancy are often ignored by both patients and physicians, and this, together with the greater difficulty of diagnostic imaging, probably results in the proven delay in the detection of breast cancers during pregnancy. The diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer are becoming more and more important, as the fulfillment of the desire to have children is increasingly postponed until a later age associated with a higher risk of carcinoma, and improved cure rates of solid tumors no longer exclude subsequent pregnancies. The following article summarizes the special features of the diagnosis and primary therapy of pregnancy-associated breast cancer with particular consideration of cytostatic therapy

Male breast cancer

Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease representing less than 1% of all breast cancers (BC) and less than 1% of cancers in men. Age at presentation is mostly in the late 60s. MBC is recognized as an estrogen-driven disease, specifically related to hyperestrogenism. About 20% of MBC patients have family history for BC. Mutations in BRCA1 and, predominantly, BRCA2, account for approximately 10% of MBC cases. Because of its rarity, MBC is often compared with female BC (FBC). Based on age-frequency distribution, age-specific incidence rate patterns and prognostic factors profiles, MBC is considered similar to late-onset, postmenopausal estrogen/progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+) FBC. However, clinical and pathological characteristics of MBC do not exactly overlap FBC. Compared with FBC, MBC has been reported to occur later in life, present at a higher stage, and display lower histologic grade, with a higher proportion of ER+ and PR+ tumors. Although rare, MBC remains a substantial cause for morbidity and mortality in men, probably because of its occurrence in advanced age and delayed diagnosis. Diagnosis and treatment of MBC generally is similar to that of FBC. Men tend to be treated with mastectomy rather than breast-conserving surgery. The backbone of adjuvant therapy or palliative treatment for advanced disease is endocrine, mostly tamoxifen. Use of FBC-based therapy led to the observation that treatment outcomes for MBC are worse and that survival rates for MBC do not improve like FBC. These different outcomes may suggest a non-appropriate utilization of treatments and that different underlying pathogenetic mechanisms may exist between male and female BC

Celecoxib in breast cancer prevention and therapy.

Breast cancer has a high incidence worldwide. The results of substantial studis reveal that inflammation plays an important role in the initiation, development, and aggressiveness of many malignancies. The use of celecoxib, a novel NSAID, is repetitively associated with the reduced risk of the occurrence and progression of a number of types of cancer, particularly breast cancer. This observation is also substantiated by various meta-analyses. Clinical trials have been implemented on integration treatment of celecoxib and shown encouraging results. Celecoxib could be treated as a potential candidate for antitumor agent. There are, nonetheless, some unaddressed questions concerning the precise mechanism underlying the anticancer effect of celecoxib as well as its activity against different types of cancer. In this review, we discuss different mechanisms of anticancer effect of celecoxib as well as preclinical/clinical results signifying this beneficial effect

The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in breast cancer : which patient benefits the most?

Bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against vascular endothelial growth factor, is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for patients with breast cancer. Bevacizumab has demonstrated a gain in progression-free survival and a trend towards an overall survival benefit in various subgroups of breast cancer. Given the lack of a predictive biomarker, we performed a literature search with regard to efficacy and tolerability of bevacizumab in different subgroups of breast cancer patients and in different settings. In the metastatic setting, the efficacy of bevacizumab has been most extensively studied and demonstrated in patients with triple-negative breast cancer, the most difficult-to-treat population among patients with advanced disease and also the group with the biggest need for new treatment options. Overall, bevacizumab is well tolerated with very few serious adverse events. Bevacizumab is also an active and feasible treatment option for patients above 70 years of age