Clinical relevance of single item quality of life indicators in cancer clinical trials

We investigated the hypothesis that global single-item quality-of-life indicators are less precise for specific treatment effects (discriminant validity) than multi-item scales but similarly efficient for overall treatment comparisons and changes over time (responsiveness) because they reflect the summation of the individual meaning and importance of various factors. Linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) indicators for physical well-being, mood and coping were compared with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD), the Mood Adjective Check List (MACL) and the emotional behaviour and social interaction scales of the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) in 84 patients with early breast cancer receiving adjuvant therapy. Discriminant validity was investigated by multitrait-multimethod correlation, responsiveness by standardized response mean (SRM). Discriminant validity of the indicators was present at baseline but less under treatment. Responsiveness was demonstrated by the expected pattern among treatments (P = 0.008). In patients without chemotherapy, the SRMs indicated moderate (0.5–0.8) to large (>0.8) improvements in physical well-being (0.70), coping (0.92), HAD anxiety (0.89) and depression (1.19), and MACL mental well-being (0.68). In patients with chemotherapy for the first 3 months, small but clinically significant improvements (>).2) included mood (0.38), coping (0.41), HAD axiety (0.31) and MACL mental well-being (0.35). Patients with 6 months chemotherapy showed no changes. The indicators also reflected mood disorders (HAD) and marked psychosocial dysfunction (SIP) at baseline and under treatment according to pre-defined cut-off levels. Global indicators were confirmed to be efficient for evaluating treatments overall and changes over time. The lower reliability of single as opposed to multi-item scales affects primarily their discriminant validity. This is less decisive in large sample sizes. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaign http://www.bjcancer.co

Menstrual cycle and timing of breast surgery in premenopausal node-positive breast cancer: Results of the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) Trial VI

Purpose It has been postulated that breast cancer surgery performed during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle is associated with poorer outcome. Patients and methods We tested this hypothesis by evaluating disease-free survival (DFS) for 1033 premenopausal patients who received definitive surgery either during the follicular phase (n = 358) or the luteal phase (n = 675). All patients were enrolled in a randomized trial conducted between July 1986 and April 1993. All had node positive breast cancer and randomization was stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status. AU patients received at least three cycles of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). The median follow-up was 60 months. Results Patients who underwent definitive surgery for breast cancer in the follicular phase had a slightly worse disease-free survival than those operated on during the luteal phase (five-year DFS percentage: 53% versus 58%; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.38; P = 0.20). The effect was significantly greater for the subpopulation of 300 patients with ER-negative primaries (P = 0.02 interaction effect; five-year DFS percentages 42% vs. 59%; hazard ratio 1.60; 95% CI, 1.12-2.25; P 0.008). The effect of timing of surgery diminished for analyses based on lesser surgical procedures, e.g., excisional biopsies. In particular, no effect of timing was observed for fine needle aspiration procedures. Conclusion Surgical procedures which are more extensive than a fine needle aspiration biopsy might be associated with worse prognosis if conducted during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. This phenomenon was seen predominantly for high risk breast cancer with low levels or no estrogen receptors in the primary tumo

Duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a joint analysis of two randomised trials investigating three versus six courses of CMF

Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil adjuvant combination chemotherapy for breast cancer is currently used for the duration of six monthly courses. We performed a joint analysis of two studies on the duration of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil in patients with node-positive breast cancer to investigate whether three courses of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil might suffice. The International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI randomly assigned 735 pre- and perimenopausal patients to receive ‘classical’ cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil for three consecutive cycles, or the same chemotherapy for six consecutive cycles. The German Breast Cancer Study Group randomised 289 patients to receive either three or six cycles of i.v. cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil day 1, 8. Treatment effects were estimated using Cox regression analysis stratified by clinical trial without further adjustment for covariates. The 5-year disease-free survival per cents (±s.e.) were 54±2% for three cycles and 55±2% for six cycles (n=1024; risk ratio (risk ratio: CMF×3/CMF×6), 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.18; P=0.99). Use of three rather than six cycles was demonstrated to be adequate in both studies for patients at least 40-years-old with oestrogen-receptor-positive tumours (n=594; risk ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.08; P=0.19). In fact, results slightly favoured three cycles over six for this subgroup, and the 95% confidence interval excluded an adverse effect of more than 2% with respect to absolute 5-year survival. In contrast, three cycles appeared to be possibly inferior to six cycles for women less than 40-years-old (n=190; risk ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.80; P=0.22) and for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative tumours (n=302; risk ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.57; P=0.37). Thus, three initial cycles of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil chemotherapy were as effective as six cycles for older patients (40-years-old) with oestrogen-receptor-positive tumours, while six cycles of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil might still be required for other cohorts. Because endocrine therapy with tamoxifen and GnRH analogues is now available for younger women with oestrogen-receptor-positive tumours, the need for six cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil is unclear and requires further investigation

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

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

Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials

Background Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for early breast cancer can make breast-conserving surgery more feasible and might be more likely to eradicate micrometastatic disease than might the same chemotherapy given after surgery. We investigated the long-term benefits and risks of NACT and the influence of tumour characteristics on outcome with a collaborative meta-analysis of individual patient data from relevant randomised trials. Methods We obtained information about prerandomisation tumour characteristics, clinical tumour response, surgery, recurrence, and mortality for 4756 women in ten randomised trials in early breast cancer that began before 2005 and compared NACT with the same chemotherapy given postoperatively. Primary outcomes were tumour response, extent of local therapy, local and distant recurrence, breast cancer death, and overall mortality. Analyses by intention-to-treat used standard regression (for response and frequency of breast-conserving therapy) and log-rank methods (for recurrence and mortality). Findings Patients entered the trials from 1983 to 2002 and median follow-up was 9 years (IQR 5–14), with the last follow-up in 2013. Most chemotherapy was anthracycline based (3838 [81%] of 4756 women). More than two thirds (1349 [69%] of 1947) of women allocated NACT had a complete or partial clinical response. Patients allocated NACT had an increased frequency of breast-conserving therapy (1504 [65%] of 2320 treated with NACT vs 1135 [49%] of 2318 treated with adjuvant chemotherapy). NACT was associated with more frequent local recurrence than was adjuvant chemotherapy: the 15 year local recurrence was 21·4% for NACT versus 15·9% for adjuvant chemotherapy (5·5% increase [95% CI 2·4–8·6]; rate ratio 1·37 [95% CI 1·17–1·61]; p=0·0001). No significant difference between NACT and adjuvant chemotherapy was noted for distant recurrence (15 year risk 38·2% for NACT vs 38·0% for adjuvant chemotherapy; rate ratio 1·02 [95% CI 0·92–1·14]; p=0·66), breast cancer mortality (34·4% vs 33·7%; 1·06 [0·95–1·18]; p=0·31), or death from any cause (40·9% vs 41·2%; 1·04 [0·94–1·15]; p=0·45). Interpretation Tumours downsized by NACT might have higher local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy than might tumours of the same dimensions in women who have not received NACT. Strategies to mitigate the increased local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy in tumours downsized by NACT should be considered—eg, careful tumour localisation, detailed pathological assessment, and appropriate radiotherapy