Neoadjuvant Dose-Dense Gemcitabine plus Docetaxel and Vinorelbine plus Epirubicin for Operable Breast Cancer
Tóm tắt
Background: Neoadjuvant anti-tumor activity of an alternating taxane- and anthracycline-based dose-dense regimen in patients with operable, noninflammatory large breast cancer was investigated.
Objective: The objective is to study the rate of pathological complete response in patients with breast cancer receiving dose-dense chemotherapy sequentially with gemcitabine plus docetaxel and vinorelbine plus epirubicin.
Methods: Women (n = 74) with clinical stage II or III breast cancer were enrolled in this open-label, multicenter study to receive six 2-weekly courses of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 100mg/m2 on days 29 and 43. Patients with an objective response on day 56 then received another cycle of gemcitabine/ docetaxel on day 57 and of vinorelbine/epirubicin on day 71. Conservative surgery was scheduled for all patients.
Results: Of the patients enrolled, 30% had triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 22% overall, but was higher in TNBC than patients without TNBC (40.9% vs 14.0%; p=0.028). Among patients with a pCR, patients with TNBC had similar recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) to patients without TNBC. Among those without a pCR, RFS rates for patients with TNBC were significantly lower than for patients without TNBC (p=0.04). The most common severe hematologic toxicity was neutropenia.
Conclusions: Administering four drugs in a dose-dense alternating sequence gave a high pCR in patients with operable, invasive breast cancer. Patients with TNBC with a pCR had similar OS to patients without TNBC, whereas patients with TNBC without a pCR had poorer survival rate than their non- TNBC counterparts.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bafaloukos D. Neo-adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2005; 16 Suppl. 2: ii174–81
Hennessy B, Hanrahan E, Valero V. Neoadjuvant therapy of breast cancer. Am J Cancer 2006; 5: 411–25
Van Praagh I, Cure H, Leduc B, et al. Efficacy of a primary chemotherapy regimen combining vinorelbine, epirubicin, and methotrexate (VEM) as neoadjuvant treatment in 89 patients with operable breast cancer. Oncologist 2002; 7: 418–23
Mieog J, van der Hage J, van de Velde C. Preoperative chemotherapy for women with operable breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007 Apr 18; (2): CD005002
Dent R, Trudeau M, Pritchard KI, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: clinical features and patterns of recurrence. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 4429–34
Liu Z, Liu G, Yang W, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer types exhibit a distinct poor clinical characteristic in lymph node-negative Chinese patients. Oncol Rep 2008; 20: 987–94
Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Green AR, et al. Prognosticmarkers in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer 2007; 109: 25–32
Tian XS, Cong MH, Zhou WH, et al. Clinicopathologic and prognostic characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer. Onkologie 2008; 31: 610–4
Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 2006; 295: 2492–502
Keam B, Im SA, Kim HJ, et al. Prognostic impact of clinicopathologic parameters in stage II/III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel and doxorubicin chemotherapy: paradoxical features of the triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2007; 7: 203
Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess K, et al. Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triplenegative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 1275–81
Rodriguez-Pinilla SM, Sarrio D, Honrado E, et al. Prognostic significance of basal-like phenotype and fascin expression in node-negative invasive breast carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12: 1533–9
Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 2329–34
Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF, et al. Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 5678–85
Cleator S, Heller W, Coombes RC. Triple-negative breast cancer: therapeutic options. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 235–44
Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 1431–9
von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, Vogel P, et al. Intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-responding breast cancer: phase III randomized GeparTrio study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 552–62
Schneeweiss A, Huober J, Sinn HP, et al. Gemcitabine, epirubicin and docetaxel as primary systemic therapy in patients with early breast cancer: results of a multicentre phase I/II study. Eur J Cancer 2004; 40: 2432–8
Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 1–10
European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. RECIST version 1.0. 2000 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.eortc.be/Recist/Default.htm [Accessed 2009 Dec 17]
Hammond MEH, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 28: 2784–95
National Cancer Institute. Common Toxicity Criteria Manual 1 June 1999 version 2.0 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ctep.cancer.gov/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/ctcv20_4-30-992.pdf [Accessed 2008 Dec 17]
Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 778–85
Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 873–9
Chua S, Smith IE, A’Hern RP, et al. Neoadjuvant vinorelbine/epirubicin (VE) versus standard adriamycin/cyclophosphamide (AC) in operable breast cancer: analysis of response and tolerability in a randomised phase III trial (TOPIC 2). Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 1435–41
Conte PF, Donati S, Gennari A, et al. Primary chemotherapy with gemcitabine, epirubicin and taxol (GET) in operable breast cancer: a phase II study. Br J Cancer 2005; 93: 406–11
Fountzilas G, Skarlos D, Dafni U, et al. Postoperative dosedense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin, followed by CMF with or without paclitaxel, in patients with highrisk operable breast cancer: a randomized phase III study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group. Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 1762–71
Therasse P, Mauriac L, Welnicka-Jaskiewicz M, et al. Final results of a randomized phase III trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with a doseintensified epirubicin and cyclophosphamide + filgrastim as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer: an EORTC-NCIC-SAKK multicenter study. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 843–50
Mehta RS. Dose-dense and/or metronomic schedules of specific chemotherapies consolidate the chemosensitivity of triple-negative breast cancer: a step toward reversing triple-negative paradox [letter]. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 3286–8; author reply 3288