Breast Neoplasms: Gradishar WJ

Carlson RW, Allred DC, Anderson BO, Burstein HJ, Carter WB, Edge SB, Erban JK, Farrar WB, Goldstein LJ, Gradishar WJ, Hayes DF, Hudis CA, Jahanzeb M, Kiel K, Ljung BM, Marcom PK, Mayer IA, McCormick B, Nabell LM, Pierce LJ, Reed EC, Smith ML, Somlo G, Theriault RL, Topham NS, Ward JH, Winer EP, Wolff AC, Anonymous00042. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #19200416 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Bevers TB, Armstrong DK, Arun B, Carlson RW, Cowan KH, Daly MB, Fleming I, Garber JE, Gemignani M, Gradishar WJ, Krontiras H, Kulkarni S, Laronga C, Lawton T, Loftus L, Macdonald DJ, Mahoney MC, Merajver SD, Seewaldt V, Sellin RV, Shapiro CL, Singletary E, Ward JH, Anonymous00155. · National Comprehensive Cancer Network · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #17927926 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Carlson RW, Moench SJ, Hammond ME, Perez EA, Burstein HJ, Allred DC, Vogel CL, Goldstein LJ, Somlo G, Gradishar WJ, Hudis CA, Jahanzeb M, Stark A, Wolff AC, Press MF, Winer EP, Paik S, Ljung BM, Anonymous00047. · Stanford Hospital and Clinics. · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #16813731 No free full text.

Abstract: The NCCN HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer Task Force was convened to critically evaluate the ability of the level of HER2 expression or gene amplification in breast cancer tumors to serve as a prognostic and a predictive factor in the metastatic and adjuvant settings, to assess the reliability of the methods of measuring HER2 expression or gene amplification in the laboratory, and to make recommendations regarding the interpretation of test results. The Task Force is a multidisciplinary panel of 24 experts in breast cancer representing the disciplines of medical oncology, pathology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, epidemiology, and patient advocacy. Invited members included members of the NCCN Breast Cancer Panel and other needed experts selected solely by the NCCN. During a 2-day meeting, individual task force members provided didactic presentations critically evaluating important aspects of HER2 biology and epidemiology: HER2 as a prognostic and predictive factor; results from clinical trials in which trastuzumab was used as a targeted therapy against HER2 in the adjuvant and metastatic settings; the available testing methodologies for HER2, including sensitivity, specificity, and ability to provide prognostic and predictive information; and the principles on which HER2 testing should be based. Each task force member was charged with identifying evidence relevant to their specific expertise and presentation. Following the presentations, an evidence-based consensus approach was used to formulate recommendations relating to the pathologic and clinical application of the evidence to breast cancer patient evaluation and care. In areas of controversy, this process extended beyond the meeting to achieve consensus. The Task Force concluded that accurate assignment of the HER2 status of invasive breast cancer is essential to clinical decision making in the treatment of breast cancer in both adjuvant and metastatic settings. Formal validation and concordance testing should be performed and reported by laboratories performing HER2 testing for clinical purposes. If appropriate quality control/assurance procedures are in place, either immunohistochemistry (IHC) or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) methods may be used. A tumor with an IHC score of 0 or 1+, an average HER2 gene/chromosome 17 ratio of less than 1.8, or an average number of HER2 gene copies/cell of 4 or less as determined by FISH is considered to be HER2 negative. A tumor with an IHC score of 3+, an average HER2 gene/chromosome 17 ratio of greater than 2.2 by FISH, or an average number of HER2 gene copies/cell of 6 or greater is considered HER2 positive. A tumor with an IHC score of 2+ should be further tested using FISH, with HER2 status determined by the FISH result. Tumor samples with an average HER2 gene/chromosome ratio of 1.8 to 2.2 or average number of HER2 gene copies/cell in the range of greater than 4 to less than 6 are considered to be borderline, and strategies to assign the HER2 status of such samples are proposed.

Carlson RW, Brown E, Burstein HJ, Gradishar WJ, Hudis CA, Loprinzi C, Mamounas EP, Perez EA, Pritchard K, Ravdin P, Recht A, Somlo G, Theriault RL, Winer EP, Wolff AC, Anonymous00401. · Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #16507275 No free full text.

Abstract: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) first published the NCCN Breast Cancer Treatment Guidelines in 1996. The Guidelines address the treatment of all stages of breast cancer across the spectrum of patient care and have been updated yearly. Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer has undergone an especially rapid evolution over the past few years. Therefore, the NCCN Breast Cancer Guidelines Panel was supplemented by additional experts to form the Adjuvant Therapy Task Force to provide a forum for an extended discussion and expanded input to the adjuvant therapy recommendations for the Breast Cancer Treatment Guidelines. Issues discussed included methods of risk-stratification for recurrence; how biologic markers such as HER2 status, quantitative estrogen receptor, or genetic markers can be incorporated as prognostic or predictive factors; and how age, menopausal status, and estrogen receptor levels impact benefits from chemotherapy and endocrine therapy. Additionally, the task force discussed the strategies for use of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and the potential incorporation of trastuzumab into adjuvant therapy of women with HER2/neu positive breast cancer. This supplement summarizes the background data and ensuing discussion from the Adjuvant Task Force meeting.

Carlson RW, Anderson BO, Burstein HJ, Cox CE, Edge SB, Farrar WB, Goldstein LJ, Gradishar WJ, Hayes DF, Hudis C, Jahanzeb M, Ljung BM, Marks LB, McCormick B, Nabell LM, Pierce LJ, Reed EC, Silver SM, Smith ML, Somlo G, Theriault RL, Ward JH, Winer EP, Wolff AC, Anonymous00249. · Stanford Hospital & Clinics, USA. · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #16002000 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Carlson RW, Anderson BO, Bensinger W, Cox CE, Davidson NE, Edge SB, Farrar WB, Goldstein LJ, Gradishar WJ, Lichter AS, McCormick B, Nabell LM, Reed EC, Silver SM, Smith ML, Somlo G, Theriault R, Ward JH, Winer EP, Wolff A, Anonymous00205. · Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Palo Alto, CA, USA. · Oncology (Williston Park). · Pubmed #11195418 No free full text.

Abstract: The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. In many situations, the patient and physician have the responsibility to jointly explore and ultimately select the most appropriate option from among the available alternatives. With rare exception, the evaluation, treatment, and follow-up recommendations contained within these guidelines were based largely on the results of past and present clinical trials. However, there is not a single clinical situation in which the treatment of breast cancer has been optimized with respect to either maximizing cure or minimizing toxicity and disfigurement. Therefore, patient and physician participation in prospective clinical trials allows patients not only to receive state-of-the-art cancer treatment but also to contribute to the improvement of treatment of future patients.

Hensley ML, Schuchter LM, Lindley C, Meropol NJ, Cohen GI, Broder G, Gradishar WJ, Green DM, Langdon RJ, Mitchell RB, Negrin R, Szatrowski TP, Thigpen JT, Von Hoff D, Wasserman TH, Winer EP, Pfister DG. · American Society of Clinical Oncology, Health Services Research Department, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #10506637 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: Because toxicities associated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy can adversely affect short- and long-term patient quality of life, can limit the dose and duration of treatment, and may be life-threatening, specific agents designed to ameliorate or eliminate certain chemotherapy and radiotherapy toxicities have been developed. Variability in interpretation of the available data pertaining to the efficacy of the three United States Food and Drug Administration-approved agents that have potential chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-protectant activity-dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine-and questions about the role of these protectant agents in cancer care led to concern about the appropriate use of these agents. The American Society of Clinical Oncology sought to establish evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines for the use of dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine in patients who are not enrolled on clinical treatment trials. METHODS: A multidisciplinary Expert Panel reviewed the clinical data regarding the activity of dexrazoxane, mesna, and amifostine. A computerized literature search was performed using MEDLINE. In addition to reports collected by individual Panel members, all articles published in the English-speaking literature from June 1997 through December 1998 were collected for review by the Panel chairpersons, and appropriate articles were distributed to the entire Panel for review. Guidelines for use, levels of evidence, and grades of recommendation were reviewed and approved by the Panel. Outcomes considered in evaluating the benefit of a chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-protectant agent included amelioration of short- and long-term chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-related toxicities, risk of tumor protection by the agent, toxicity of the protectant agent itself, quality of life, and economic impact. To the extent that these data were available, the Panel placed the greatest value on lesser toxicity that did not carry a concomitant risk of tumor protection. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Mesna: (1) Mesna, dosed as detailed in these guidelines, is recommended to decrease the incidence of standard-dose ifosfamide-associated urothelial toxicity. (2) There is insufficient evidence on which to base a guideline for the use of mesna to prevent urothelial toxicity with ifosfamide doses that exceed 2.5 g/m(2)/d. (3) Either mesna or forced saline diuresis is recommended to decrease the incidence of urothelial toxicity associated with high-dose cyclophosphamide use in the stem-cell transplantation setting. Dexrazoxane: (1) The use of dexrazoxane is not routinely recommended for patients with metastatic breast cancer who receive initial doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. (2) The use of dexrazoxane may be considered for patients with metastatic breast cancer who have received a cumulative dosage of 300 mg/m(2) or greater of doxorubicin in the metastatic setting and who may benefit from continued doxorubicin-containing therapy. (3) The use of dexrazoxane in the adjuvant setting is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. (4) The use of dexrazoxane can be considered in adult patients who have received more than 300 mg/m(2) of doxorubicin-based therapy for tumors other than breast cancer, although caution should be used in settings in which doxorubicin-based therapy has been shown to improve survival because of concerns of tumor protection by dexrazoxane. (5) There is insufficient evidence to make a guideline for the use of dexrazoxane in the treatment of pediatric malignancies, with epirubicin-based regimens, or with high-dose anthracycline-containing regimens. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence on which to base a guideline for the use of dexrazoxane in patients with cardiac risk factors or underlying cardiac disease. (6) Patients receiving dexrazoxane should continue to be monitored for cardiac toxicity. Amifostine: (1) Amifostine may be considered for the reduction of nephrotoxicity in patients receiving cisplatin-based chemoth

Gradishar WJ, Cella D. · No affiliation provided · JAMA. · Pubmed #16754726 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Gradishar WJ, Kaklamani VG. · No affiliation provided · JAMA. · Pubmed #15741536 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Gradishar WJ. · No affiliation provided · JAMA. · Pubmed #10527186 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Carlson RW, Moench S, Hurria A, Balducci L, Burstein HJ, Goldstein LJ, Gradishar WJ, Hughes KS, Jahanzeb M, Lichtman SM, Marks LB, McClure JS, McCormick B, Nabell LM, Pierce LJ, Smith ML, Topham NS, Traina TA, Ward JH, Winer EP. · No affiliation provided · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #18597715 No free full text.

Abstract: Breast cancer is common in older women, and the segment of the U.S. population aged 65 years and older is growing rapidly. Consequently, awareness is increasing of the need to identify breast cancer treatment recommendations to assure optimal, individualized treatment of older women with breast cancer. However, the development of these recommendations is limited by the heterogeneous nature of this population with respect to functional status, social support, life expectancy, and the presence of comorbidities, and by the underrepresentation of older patients with breast cancer in randomized clinical trials. The NCCN Breast Cancer in the Older Woman Task Force was convened to provide a forum for framing relevant questions on topics that impact older women with early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic breast cancer. The task force is a multidisciplinary panel of 18 experts in breast cancer representing medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, plastic surgery, and patient advocacy. All task force members were from NCCN institutions and were identified and invited solely by NCCN. Members were charged with identifying evidence relevant to their specific expertise. During a 2-day meeting, individual members provided didactic presentations; these presentations were followed by extensive discussions during which areas of consensus and controversy were identified on topics such as defining the "older" breast cancer patient; geriatric assessment tools in the oncology setting; attitudes of older patients with breast cancer and their physicians; tumor biology in older versus younger women with breast cancer; implementation of specific interventions in older patients with breast cancer, such as curative surgery, surgical axillary staging, radiation therapy, reconstructive surgery, endocrine therapy, chemotherapy, HER2-directed therapy, and supportive therapies; and areas requiring future studies.

Carlson RW, Anderson BO, Burstein HJ, Carter WB, Edge SB, Farrar WB, Goldstein LJ, Gradishar WJ, Hayes DF, Hudis CA, Jahanzeb M, Ljung BM, Kiel K, Marks LB, McCormick B, Nabell LM, Pierce LJ, Reed EC, Silver SM, Smith ML, Somlo G, Theriault RL, Ward JH, Winer EP, Wolff AC. · National Comprehensive Cancer Network · J Natl Compr Canc Netw. · Pubmed #17439758 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Gradishar WJ. · Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Expert Opin Pharmacother. · Pubmed #16722814 No free full text.

Abstract: Taxanes are standard treatment for metastatic breast cancer; however, the solvents used as vehicles in these formulations cause severe toxicities. The FDA recently approved a solvent-free formulation of paclitaxel for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer that utilises 130-nanometer albumin-bound (nab) technology (Abraxane; nab-paclitaxel) to circumvent the requirement for solvents. nab-Paclitaxel utilises the natural properties of albumin to reversibly bind paclitaxel, transport it across the endothelial cell and concentrate it in areas of tumour. The proposed mechanism of drug delivery involves, in part, glycoprotein 60-mediated endothelial cell transcytosis of paclitaxel-bound albumin and accumulation in the area of tumour by albumin binding to SPARC (secreted protein, acidic and rich in cysteine). Clinical studies have shown that nab-paclitaxel is significantly more effective than paclitaxel formulated as Cremophor EL (CrEL, Taxol, CrEL-paclitaxel), with almost double the response rate, increased time to disease progression and increased survival in second-line patients. The absence of CrEL from the formulation is associated with decreased neutropenia and rapid improvement of peripheral neuropathy with nab-paclitaxel, compared with CrEL-paclitaxel. For these reasons, nab-paclitaxel can be administered using higher doses of paclitaxel than that achievable with CrEL-paclitaxel, with shorter infusion duration and without the requirement for corticosteroid and antihistamine premedication to reduce the risk of solvent-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. Taken together, these studies have demonstrated that nab technology has increased the therapeutic index of paclitaxel compared with the conventional, solvent-based formulation.

Kaklamani VG, Gradishar WJ. · Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine of Northwestern University, 676 North St. Clair Street, Suite 850, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Curr Treat Options Oncol. · Pubmed #16455023 No free full text.

Abstract: We now recognize that all breast cancers are not the same. Different characteristics in gene expression profiles result in differential clinical behavior. With the use of gene microarrays, different subtypes of breast cancer have been characterized. The basal subtype is characterized by high expression of keratins 5 and 17, laminin, and fatty acid-binding protein 7. The ERBB2+ subtype is characterized by high expression of genes in the ERBB2 amplicon. The luminal A subtype is characterized by the highest expression of the ER alpha gene. The luminal B and C subtypes have a lower expression of the ER cluster. The importance of these different subtypes lies in the fact that they differ in clinical outcome, with the basal and ERBB2+ subtypes having the worse prognosis and the luminal A group having the best prognosis. Different strategies for evaluating tumors in a clinical setting have been developed. Two such strategies are the 21-gene assay (Oncotype DX; Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA), which is currently in commercial use in the United States, and the 70-gene assay, which has been developed by a group in the Netherlands. These assays have been shown to predict clinical outcome and response to therapy. However, to date these gene assays have not been studied in a prospective manner. Over the next year, prospective clinical trials will be initiated using these predictive tools in the treatment of breast cancer. In the near future, clinical decisions will most likely be dictated by the genetic characteristics of the tumor, with the clinical characteristics becoming less important. Tailoring our treatment based on individual tumor characteristics will help us develop better therapeutic strategies and save many patients from receiving unnecessary toxic therapy.

Cianfrocca M, Gradishar WJ. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA. · Oncologist. · Pubmed #16314287 links to  free full text

Abstract: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among U.S. women, with more than 200,000 new cases diagnosed annually. In the U.S., mortality from breast cancer has declined in recent years as a result of more widespread screening, leading to earlier detection, as well as advances in the adjuvant treatment of early-stage disease. It is widely accepted that the appropriate use of adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy improves the disease-free and overall survival of patients with early-stage breast cancer. It is, therefore, standard clinical practice to administer adjuvant systemic therapy to patients with node-positive and high-risk, node-negative breast cancer. There remain, however, many controversies in the primary systemic therapy of breast cancer, which are discussed in this review.

Kaklamani VG, Gradishar WJ. · Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Minerva Ginecol. · Pubmed #16205597 No free full text.

Abstract: In the past few years the treatment of early stage breast cancer has gone through several important changes. Both chemotherapy and hormonal therapy have been shown by large, randomized trials to offer a survival advantage. The most commonly used chemotherapeutic agents used in the US are doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). However, 3 studies have suggested that there may be an advantage in the use of taxanes in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Furthermore the use of dose dense chemotherapy, incorporating AC and paclitaxel, has shown very promising results. It is well established that tamoxifen (T), a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), improves overall survival (OS) in women with hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer. However, the results from large multicenter, randomized trials, suggest the potential superiority of aromatase inhibitors (AIs), compared to T or an advantage of sequencing T followed by an AI. The role ovarian suppression is still being investigated in patients who have received prior chemotherapy. Newer agents, such as the monoclonal antibody against the her2/neu receptor, trastuzumab, are now being studied as adjuvant therapy in early stage breast cancer. In the next few years, with the completion of several large randomized trials, we will be able to answer several questions, including the optimal way of incorporating AIs into the adjuvant therapy, the long-term sequella of using trastuzumab in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer and the role of ovarian suppression combined with an AI in premenopausal women with breast cancer.

Kaklamani VG, Gradishar WJ. · Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA. · Cancer Invest. · Pubmed #16203663 No free full text.

Abstract: The treatment of early-stage breast cancer includes the use of chemotherapeutic and hormonal agents. Both chemotherapy and hormonal therapy have been shown by large, randomized trials to offer a survival advantage. The most commonly used chemotherapeutic agents used in the United States are doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). However, 3 studies have suggested that there may be an advantage in the use of taxanes in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Furthermore the use of dose dense chemotherapy, incorporating AC and paclitaxel, has shown very promising results. It is well established that tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), improves overall survival (OS) in women with hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer. However, the results from large multicenter, randomized trials, suggest the potential superiority of aromatase inhibitors, compared to tamoxifen or an advantage of sequencing tamoxifen followed by an aromatase inhibitor (AI). The role of ovarian suppression is still being investigated in patients who have received prior chemotherapy. Newer agents, such as the monoclonal antibody against the HER2/neu receptor, trastuzumab, are now being studied as adjuvant therapy in early-stage breast cancer. In the next few years, with the completion of several large randomized trials, we will be able to answer several questions, including the optimal way of incorporating AIs into adjuvant therapy, the long-term sequella of using trastuzumab in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer and the role of ovarian suppression combined with an aromatse inhibitor in premenopausal women with breast cancer.

Gradishar WJ. · Feinberg School of Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Ill. 60611, USA. · Oncology. · Pubmed #16088229 No free full text.

Abstract: Because of its proven efficacy profile based on long-term data, tamoxifen has been the standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-sensitive early breast cancer for the past 30 years. However, there is well-established evidence that long-term use of tamoxifen is associated with serious side effects. As adjuvant endocrine therapy is generally administered for long periods of time, the safety and tolerability of agents used in this setting are of particular importance. Due to their superior efficacy over tamoxifen, newer agents, such as the third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs), are already established therapies for the treatment of advanced breast cancer. In addition, recent trials indicate that the AI anastrozole ('Arimidex') has improved efficacy compared with tamoxifen in the adjuvant setting in postmenopausal women. The other third-generation AIs have reported disease-free survival benefits but not in the absence of prior treatment with tamoxifen; letrozole ('Femara') has been compared with placebo following 5 years of tamoxifen therapy and exemestane ('Aromasin') has been compared with tamoxifen following 2-3 years of prior treatment with tamoxifen. Long-term safety data show that anastrozole also has a more favorable overall safety profile compared with tamoxifen, particularly in terms of life-threatening events such as endometrial cancer and thromboembolism. Anastrozole alone, therefore, provides a new option for adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer. The AIs have differing pharmacological profiles, which may translate into dissimilar adverse event profiles in the adjuvant treatment setting, but patient follow-up in most trials is relatively short to make a valid comparison. It cannot, therefore, be assumed that all AIs will be equally well tolerated in the adjuvant setting. Further data on the long-term safety of AIs other than anastrozole are therefore required to allow overall risk:benefit assessments on these agents to be made.

Manders JB, Gradishar WJ. · Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Breast Cancer. · Pubmed #15858435 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Gradishar WJ. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, 676 North St Clair, Suite 850, Chicago, IL, USA. · Breast Cancer Res Treat. · Pubmed #15770535 No free full text.

Abstract: There remains a number of unmet clinical needs in patients with breast cancer that research and development aims to address. More sensitive and specific indicators of prognosis are required to identify those patients at greatest risk for disease progression. A number of biological markers including the cyclins, circulating epithelial cells, and components of the urokinase plasminogen system have been shown to correlate with patient outcome. Genomic analysis also has the potential to predict patient response to specific agents, thus ensuring patients derive the maximum benefit from the treatment they receive. Patients who require treatment are often exposed to the undesirable toxic effects that are associated with some treatments. Liposomal and nanoparticle formulations of currently available agents have been shown to be at least as effective as their parent compounds but with improved safety and tolerability profiles. Studies into patient quality of life during therapy have highlighted the importance of early administration of an erythropoietic agent to treat chemotherapy-induced anemia. Further research in breast cancer should further optimize the treatment patients receive ensuring that patients not only live longer but also have quality survival.

Sokolowicz LE, Gradishar WJ. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Northwestern University, 676 North St. Clair Street, Suite 850, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Curr Oncol Rep. · Pubmed #15610684 No free full text.

Abstract: Endocrine therapies have played an important role in the management of breast cancer for many years. Tamoxifen had been the unchallenged standard in the adjuvant setting until recently. Data from recent clinical trials have emphasized the emerging roles of aromatase inhibitors and ovarian ablation in patients with early breast cancer. This review highlights previous data that led to the recognition of tamoxifen as the gold standard hormonal therapy in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. We then discuss clinical trials demonstrating the impact of aromatase inhibitors as an alternative to tamoxifen or as a component of sequential treatment with tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. Finally, we review data related to the incorporation of ovarian ablation into the treatment of early breast cancer in premenopausal women.

Sokolowicz LE, Gradishar WJ. · Feinberg School of Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Clin Breast Cancer. · Pubmed #15347436 No free full text.

Abstract: The role of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy has gone unchallenged until recently. With the introduction of the selective aromatase inhibitors (AIs), the paradigm for treatment of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women is changing. New data from randomized clinical trials have shown the impact of the use of an AI compared with tamoxifen or in sequence with tamoxifen. This review will emphasize some of the highlights from these data sets and the limitations of our current knowledge. Finally, we will discuss the implications of the use of nonselective AIs in the adjuvant setting for the patient who develops recurrent metastatic disease.

Gradishar WJ, Jordan VC. · Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. · Cancer Chemother Biol Response Modif. · Pubmed #15338746 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Gradishar WJ. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, 676 North St. Clair, Suite 850, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA. · Oncologist. · Pubmed #15266091 links to  free full text

Abstract: Most patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) ultimately die due to disease progression. Consequently, treatments for ABC are predominantly palliative in nature and, therefore, the tolerability profile of a given treatment is particularly relevant in these patients. While cytotoxic chemotherapy and endocrine therapy exhibit efficacy in hormone-sensitive, advanced disease, it is endocrine therapy that combines efficacy with minimal acute toxicity. Tamoxifen has been the chosen endocrine therapy for postmenopausal, hormone-sensitive, ABC for over 20 years. More recently, new endocrine agents with different mechanisms of action from tamoxifen have been introduced. Evidence indicates that the aromatase inhibitors anastrozole (Arimidex; AstraZeneca; Wilmington, DE), letrozole (Femara; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.; East Hanover, NJ) and exemestane (Aromasin; Pharmacia Corp.; Peapack, NJ) offer superior efficacy and tolerability to tamoxifen in the first-line treatment of postmenopausal, hormone-sensitive ABC. Similarly, after tamoxifen failure, fulvestrant (Faslodex; AstraZeneca), a new estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist that downregulates the ER, is at least as effective as anastrozole, is well tolerated, and is not cross-resistant with tamoxifen. Unlike tamoxifen, fulvestrant has no known agonist effects. The sequential use of such agents may prolong the time during which endocrine therapies can be used, thereby avoiding the more acute toxicities associated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Indeed, a series of studies has shown that this sequential use is a relevant, active, and well-tolerated option. Establishing the comparative efficacies and optimal sequences that incorporate the newer endocrine agents will be central in determining the future role of hormonal therapy in ABC; the results of this work will determine the relative place of tamoxifen in what is a rapidly changing therapeutic environment.

Estévez LG, Gradishar WJ. · Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain. · Clin Cancer Res. · Pubmed #15161677 links to  free full text

Abstract: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) is standard therapy for patients with locally advanced breast cancer and is increasingly used for early-stage operable disease. The aim of NC is a pathological complete response (pCR) in the breast and axillary lymph nodes, which is the best predictor of improved outcome and prolonged survival. The taxanes docetaxel and paclitaxel are potent agents in breast cancer management, with promising single-agent activity and acceptable tolerability in the neoadjuvant setting. In this review of the taxanes as NC for operable and inoperable breast cancer, we include all fully published Phase II-III studies enrolling > or =30 patients. Current evidence suggests that the sequential administration of taxane- and anthracycline-based therapy may be superior to concomitant administration. Indeed, until the recent Phase III Aberdeen study (n = 162), it was uncertain whether NC could prolong survival. In this study, sequential docetaxel after anthracycline-based NC significantly enhanced the clinical response rate and pathological complete response, and yielded a significant 3-year survival advantage, versus anthracycline-based NC alone. Recently, the Phase III National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial B27 trial (n = 2411) showed that sequential docetaxel after doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide significantly increased both clinical and pathological response rates for operable breast cancer, with the benefit evident in both estrogen receptor-positive and estrogen receptor-negative patients. This apparent superiority of a sequential anthracycline-taxane regimen is limited to docetaxel, with no similar Phase III trials of paclitaxel versus a non-taxane-based comparator having been conducted to date. In conclusion, current evidence supports the inclusion of a taxane in NC schedules for patients with large and locally advanced breast cancer.