38 research outputs found

    Analysis of trastuzumab and chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer after the failure of at least one earlier combination: An observational study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Combining trastuzumab and chemotherapy is standard in her2/neu overexpressing advanced breast cancer. It is not established however, whether trastuzumab treatment should continue after the failure of one earlier combination. In this trial, we report our experience with continued treatment beyond disease progression. METHODS: Fifty-four patients, median age 46 years, range 25–73 years, were included. We analysed for time to tumour progression (TTP) for first, second and beyond second line treatment, response rates and overall survival. RESULTS: Median time of observation was 24 months, range 7–51. Response rates for first line treatment were 7.4% complete remission (CR), 35.2% partial remissions (PR), 42.6% stable disease > 6 months (SD) and 14.8% of patients experienced disease progression despite treatment (PD). Corresponding numbers for second line were 3.7% CR, 22.2% PR, 42.6% SD and 31.5% PD; numbers for treatment beyond second line (60 therapies, 33 pts 3(rd )line, 18 pts 4(th )line, 6 pts 5(th )line, 2 pts 6(th )line and 1 patient 7(th )line) were 1.7% CR, 28.3% PR, 28.3% SD and 41.6% PD respectively. Median TTP was 6 months (m) in the first line setting, and also 6 m for second line and beyond second line. An asymptomatic drop of left ventricular ejection fraction below 50% was observed in one patient. No case of symptomatic congestive heart failure was observed. CONCLUSION: The data presented clearly strengthen evidence that patients do profit from continued trastuzumab treatment. The fact that TTP did not decrease significantly from first line to beyond second line treatment is especially noteworthy. Still, randomized trials are warranted

    Pathologic and biologic response to preoperative endocrine therapy in patients with ER-positive ductal carcinoma in situ

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Endocrine therapy is commonly recommended in the adjuvant setting for patients as treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, it is unknown whether a neoadjuvant (preoperative) anti-estrogen approach to DCIS results in any biological change. This study was undertaken to investigate the pathologic and biomarker changes in DCIS following neoadjuvant endocrine therapy compared to a group of patients who did not undergo preoperative anti-estrogenic treatment to determine whether such treatment results in detectable histologic alterations. Methods Patients (n = 23) diagnosed with ER-positive pure DCIS by stereotactic core biopsy were enrolled in a trial of neoadjuvant anti-estrogen therapy followed by definitive excision. Patients on hormone replacement therapy, with palpable masses, or with histologic or clinical suspicion of invasion were excluded. Premenopausal women were treated with tamoxifen and postmenopausal women were treated with letrozole. Pathologic markers of proliferation, inflammation, and apoptosis were evaluated at baseline and at three months. Biomarker changes were compared to a cohort of patients who had not received preoperative treatment. Results Median age of the cohort was 53 years (range 38–78); 14 were premenopausal. Following treatment, predominant morphologic changes included increased multinucleated histiocytes and degenerated cells, decreased duct extension, and prominent periductal fibrosis. Two postmenopausal patients had ADH only with no residual DCIS at excision. Postmenopausal women on letrozole had significant reduction of PR, and Ki67 as well as increase in CD68-positive cells. For premenopausal women on tamoxifen treatment, the only significant change was increase in CD68. No change in cleaved caspase 3 was found. Two patients had invasive cancer at surgery. Conclusion Preoperative therapy for DCIS is associated with significant pathologic alterations. These changes may be clinically significant. Further work is needed to identify which women may be the best candidates for such treatment for DCIS, and whether best responders may safely avoid surgical intervention. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT0029074

    Comparison of HER-2 overexpression in primary breast cancer and metastatic sites and its effect on biological targeting therapy of metastatic disease

    Get PDF
    HER-2 overexpression, a predictive marker of tumour aggressiveness and responsiveness to therapy, occurs in 20–30% of breast cancer. Although breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, HER-2 measurement is carried out in primary tumour. This study aims to evaluate HER-2 overexpression in primary and metastases and its effect on treatment decisions. Biopsies from primary breast cancer and corresponding metastases from 58 patients were studied. HER-2 overexpression was evaluated immunohistochemically in all primary and metastatic sites. Positive overexpression in primary and/or metastases was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). Discordance in HER-2 overexpression between primary and metastatic sites was 14% (eight of 58 patients). Concordance was found in 50 (86%) of patients (95% CI: 77–95). In one patient (2%), HER-2 was negative in metastasis but positive in primary. In seven (12%) patients, HER-2 was positive in metastases and negative in primary (95% CI: 3.7–20), and three of them responded to trastuzumab. Gene amplification by FISH was found in all cases with HER-2 positive (+2 and +3) by immunohistochemistry. Our data suggest that a possible discordance of HER-2 overexpression between primary and metastases should be considered when making treatment decisions in patients with primary HER-2-negative tumours

    Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences

    Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF

    20-Year Risks of Breast-Cancer Recurrence after Stopping Endocrine Therapy at 5 Years

    Get PDF
    The administration of endocrine therapy for 5 years substantially reduces recurrence rates during and after treatment in women with early-stage, estrogen-receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. Extending such therapy beyond 5 years offers further protection but has additional side effects. Obtaining data on the absolute risk of subsequent distant recurrence if therapy stops at 5 years could help determine whether to extend treatment

    Breakthroughs in research and treatment of early breast cancer: an overview of the last three decades.

    No full text
    Breast cancer has become curable for the majority of women in Western Europe and North America. Advances have been made in imaging diagnostics as well as the implementation of nationwide screening programmes. Nowadays, we talk about prevention as well as treatment. Pathology has moved from pure morphology (tumour type, grade and stage) to biological characterisation of the tumour. Treatment has changed considerably through a better understanding of the disease; from a local disease predominated by extensive and mutilating surgical techniques to a point where breast cancer has come into its own as a systemic disease with equal "rights" to local as well as systemic treatment. This paradigm shift has led to a multidisciplinary approach of the understanding and treatment of breast cancer. Molecular classification has changed the understanding of breast cancer and will be the basis for an even more individualised treatment. New (biological) agents will help to further tailor treatment to response or resistance. While systemic treatment has been increased in number and duration surgical/local strategies have been reduced to minimum. Evidence-based medicine has helped to improve and standardise treatment of breast cancer. This review summarises the 10th Biedenkopf meeting that was held to review the advances in breast cancer understanding and treatment
    corecore