Breast Neoplasms: Vorobiof D

El Saghir NS, Eniu A, Carlson RW, Aziz Z, Vorobiof D, Hortobagyi GN, Anonymous00023. · Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. nagi.saghir@ aub.edu.lb · Cancer. · Pubmed #18837023 No free full text.

Abstract: The management of locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is guided by scientific advances but is limited by local resources and expertise. LABC remains very common in low-resource countries. The Systemic Therapy Focus Group met as part of the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) Summit in Budapest, Hungary, in October 2007 to discuss management and implementation of primary systemic therapy (PST) for LABC. PST is standard treatment for large operable breast cancer in enhanced-resource settings and, in all resource settings, should be standard treatment for inoperable breast cancer and for LABC. Standard PST includes anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The addition of sequential taxanes after anthracycline improves pathologic responses and breast-conservation rates and is appropriate at enhanced-resource levels; however, costs and lack of clear survival benefit do not justify their use at limited-resource levels. It remains to define better the role of endocrine therapy as PST, but it is acceptable in elderly women. Aromatase inhibitors have produced better results than tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients and are used in enhanced-resource settings. The less expensive tamoxifen remains useful in low-resource countries. Trastuzumab combined with chemotherapy yields high pathologic response rates in patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing tumors; its use in low-resource countries is limited by high costs. Most studies on PST of LABC were conducted in countries with enhanced resources. BHGI encourages conducting clinical trials in countries with limited resources.

Eniu A, Carlson RW, El Saghir NS, Bines J, Bese NS, Vorobiof D, Masetti R, Anderson BO, Anonymous00019. · Department of Breast Tumors, Cancer Institute Ion Chiricuta, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. · Cancer. · Pubmed #18837019 No free full text.

Abstract: A key determinant of breast cancer outcome is the degree to which newly diagnosed cancers are treated correctly in a timely fashion. Available resources must be applied in a rational manner to optimize population-based outcomes. A multidisciplinary international panel of experts addressed the implementation of treatment guidelines and developed process checklists for breast surgery, radiation treatment, and systemic therapy. The needed resources for stage I, stage II, locally advanced, and metastatic breast cancer were outlined, and process metrics were developed. The ability to perform modified radical mastectomy is the mainstay of locoregional treatment at the basic level of breast healthcare. Radiation therapy allows for consideration of breast-conserving therapy, postmastectomy chest wall irradiation, and palliation of painful or symptomatic metastases. Systemic therapy with cytotoxic chemotherapy is effective in the treatment of all biologic subtypes of breast cancer, but its provision is resource intensive. Although endocrine therapy requires few specialized resources, it requires knowledge of hormone receptor status. Targeted therapy against human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (anti-HER-2) is very effective in tumors that overexpress HER-2/neu receptors, but cost largely prevents its use in resource-limited environments. Incremental allocation of resources can help address economic disparities and ensure equity in access to care. Checklists and allocation tables can support the objective of offering optimal care for all patients. The use of process metrics can facilitate the development of multidisciplinary, integrated, fiscally responsible, continuously improving, and flexible approaches to the global enhancement of breast cancer treatment.

Francis P, Crown J, Di Leo A, Buyse M, Balil A, Andersson M, Nordenskjöld B, Lang I, Jakesz R, Vorobiof D, Gutiérrez J, van Hazel G, Dolci S, Jamin S, Bendahmane B, Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Piccart-Gebhart M, Anonymous00002. · Division of Haematology and Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne 8006, Australia. · J Natl Cancer Inst. · Pubmed #18182617 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Docetaxel is more effective than doxorubicin for patients with advanced breast cancer. The Breast International Group 02-98 randomized trial tested the effect of incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy and compared sequential vs concurrent administration of doxorubicin and docetaxel. METHODS: Patients with lymph node-positive breast cancer (n = 2887) were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 1) sequential control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil [CMF]); 2) concurrent control (four cycles of doxorubicin at 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide at 600 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 3) sequential docetaxel (three cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of docetaxel at 100 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF); 4) concurrent docetaxel (four cycles of doxorubicin at 50 mg/m2 plus docetaxel at 75 mg/m2, followed by three cycles of CMF). The primary comparison evaluated the efficacy of including docetaxel regardless of schedule and was planned after 1215 disease-free survival (DFS) events (ie, relapse, second primary cancer, or death from any cause). Docetaxel and control treatment groups were compared by log-rank tests, and hazard ratios (HR) of DFS events were calculated by Cox modeling. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Due to a lower-than-anticipated rate of relapse, this analysis was performed after 5 years with 732 events. Patients in control arms had a 5-year DFS of 73% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 70% to 75%). Docetaxel treatment resulted in an improvement in DFS of borderline statistical significance compared with control treatment (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.00; P = .05). However, DFS in the sequential docetaxel arm was better than that in the concurrent docetaxel arm (HR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.00) and in the sequential control arm (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating docetaxel into anthracycline-based therapy resulted in an improvement in DFS that was of borderline statistical significance. However, important differences may be related to doxorubicin and docetaxel scheduling, with sequential but not concurrent administration, appearing to produce better DFS than anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

Campone M, Cortes-Funes H, Vorobiof D, Martin M, Slabber CF, Ciruelos E, Bourbouloux E, Mendiola C, Delgado FM, Colin C, Aslanis V, Fumoleau P. · Centre René Gauducheau, 44805 Saint Herblain, France. · Br J Cancer. · Pubmed #17031408 links to  free full text

Abstract: To evaluate the single agent activity, pharmacokinetics and tolerability of the novel tubulin targeted agent vinflunine (VFL) (320 mg m(-2) q 21 days) as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC). All patients had disease progression after anthracycline/taxane (A/T) therapy. They could have received a nonanthracycline adjuvant treatment and subsequently received a first-line A/T combination for advanced/metastatic disease; or relapsed >6 months after completion of adjuvant A/T therapy and were subsequently treated with the alternative agent; or relapsed within 6 months from an adjuvant A/T combination. Objective response was documented in 18 of 60 patients enrolled (RR: 30% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18.9-43.2%)). Among the responders, seven patients had relapsed during a period of <3 months from taxane-based regimen yielding a RR of 33.3%. The median duration of response was 4.8 months (95% CI: 4.2-7.2), median progression-free survival was 3.7 months (95% CI: 2.8-4.2) and median overall survival was 14.3 months (95% CI: 9.2-19.6). The most frequent adverse event was neutropenia (grade 3 in 28.3% and grade 4 in 36.7% of patients). No febrile neutropenia was observed. Fatigue (grade 3 in 16.7% of patients) and constipation (grade 3 in 11.7% of patients) were also common; these were non-cumulative and manageable permitting achievement of a good relative dose intensity of 93.5%. Vinflunine is an active agent with acceptable tolerance in the management of MBC patients previously treated with (A/T)-based regimens. These encouraging phase II results warrant further investigation of this novel agent in combination with other active agents in this setting or in earlier stages of disease.

Nabholtz JM, Falkson C, Campos D, Szanto J, Martin M, Chan S, Pienkowski T, Zaluski J, Pinter T, Krzakowski M, Vorobiof D, Leonard R, Kennedy I, Azli N, Murawsky M, Riva A, Pouillart P, Anonymous00174. · University of California at Los Angeles, CA 90095-7077, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #12637459 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: This randomized, multicenter, phase III study compared doxorubicin and docetaxel (AT) with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) as first-line chemotherapy (CT) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 429) were randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) plus docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) (n = 214) or doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) (n = 215) on day 1, every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. RESULTS: Time to progression (TTP; primary end point) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were significantly longer with AT than AC (median TTP, 37.3 v 31.9 weeks; log-rank P =.014; median TTF, 25.6 v 23.7 weeks; log-rank P =.048). The overall response rate (ORR) was significantly greater for patients taking AT (59%, with 10% complete response [CR], 49% partial response [PR]) than for those taking AC (47%, with 7% CR, 39% PR) (P =.009). The ORR was also higher with AT in patients with visceral involvement (58% v 41%; liver, 62% v 42%; lung, 58% v 35%), three or more organs involved (59% v 40%), or prior adjuvant CT (53% v 41%). Overall survival (OS) was comparable in both arms. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was frequent in both groups, although febrile neutropenia and infections were more frequent for patients taking AT (respectively, 33% v 10%, P <.001; 8% v 2%, P =.01). Severe nonhematologic toxicity was infrequent in both groups, including grade 3/4 cardiac events (AT, 3%; AC, 4%). CONCLUSION: AT significantly improves TTP and ORR compared with AC in patients with MBC, but there is no difference in OS. AT represents a valid option for the treatment of MBC.

Chan S, Friedrichs K, Noel D, Pintér T, Van Belle S, Vorobiof D, Duarte R, Gil Gil M, Bodrogi I, Murray E, Yelle L, von Minckwitz G, Korec S, Simmonds P, Buzzi F, González Mancha R, Richardson G, Walpole E, Ronzoni M, Murawsky M, Alakl M, Riva A, Crown J, Anonymous00001. · Department of Clinical Oncology, City Hospital, Nottingham, and CRC Wessex Medical Oncology Unit, Royal South Hants Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #10561296 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: This phase III study compared docetaxel and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer who had received previous alkylating agent-containing chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for a maximum of seven treatment cycles. RESULTS: A total of 326 patients were randomized, 165 to receive doxorubicin and 161 to receive docetaxel. Overall, docetaxel produced a significantly higher rate of objective response than did doxorubicin (47.8% v 33.3%; P =.008). Docetaxel was also significantly more active than doxorubicin in patients with negative prognostic factors, such as visceral metastases (objective response, 46% v 29%) and resistance to prior chemotherapy (47% v 25%). Median time to progression was longer in the docetaxel group (26 weeks v 21 weeks; difference not significant). Median overall survival was similar in the two groups (docetaxel, 15 months; doxorubicin, 14 months). There was one death due to infection in each group, and an additional four deaths due to cardiotoxicity in the doxorubicin group. Although neutropenia was similar in both groups, febrile neutropenia and severe infection occurred more frequently in the doxorubicin group. For severe nonhematologic toxicity, the incidences of cardiac toxicity, nausea, vomiting, and stomatitis were higher among patients receiving doxorubicin, whereas diarrhea, neuropathy, fluid retention, and skin and nail changes were higher among patients receiving docetaxel. CONCLUSION: The observed differences in activity and toxicity profiles provide a basis for therapy choice and confirms the rationale for combination studies in early breast cancer.