PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alan S Coates

Publications and source records attributed to Alan S Coates.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Five years of letrozole compared with tamoxifen as initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: update of study BIG 1-98.

PURPOSE: Previous analyses of the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 four-arm study compared initial therapy with letrozole or tamoxifen including patients randomly assigned to sequential treatment whose information was censored at the time of therapy change. Because this presentation may unduly reflect early events, the present analysis is limited to patients randomly assigned to the continuous therapy arms and includes protocol-defined updated results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four thousand nine hundred twenty-two of the 8,028 postmenopausal women with receptor-positive early breast cancer randomly assigned (double-blind) to the BIG 1-98 trial were assigned to 5 years of continuous adjuvant therapy with either letrozole or tamoxifen; the remainder of women were assigned to receive the agents in sequence. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end point. RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 51 months, we observed 352 DFS events among 2,463 women receiving letrozole and 418 events among 2,459 women receiving tamoxifen. This reflected an 18% reduction in the risk of an event (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.95; P = .007). No predefined subsets showed differential benefit. Adverse events were similar to previous reports. Patients on tamoxifen experienced more thromboembolic events, endometrial pathology, hot flashes, night sweats, and vaginal bleeding. Patients on letrozole experienced more bone fractures, arthralgia, low-grade hypercholesterolemia, and cardiovascular events other than ischemia and cardiac failure. CONCLUSION: The present updated analysis, which was limited to patients on monotherapy arms in BIG 1-98, yields results similar to those from the previous primary analysis but more directly comparable with results from other trials of continuous therapy using a single endocrine agent.

Adult↗
PubMed2007

Psychosocial factors and patients' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Many women who have had adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer judge small benefits sufficient to make it worthwhile despite significant side effects and inconvenience. The rationality of these preferences has been questioned. We sought to better understand such preferences by assessing associations between preferences and psychosocial factors, and by asking women who judged negligible benefits sufficient to explain why. METHODS: We recruited 83 consecutive consenting women who had completed adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer 3-34 months earlier. Preferences were elicited during a structured, scripted interview using four sets of validated, hypothetical trade-off scenarios about the possible benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival times (5 and 15 years) and rates (65 and 85% at 5 years). Women completed questionnaires measuring anxiety, depression, optimism, quality and quantity of social support, and illness perceptions. RESULTS: More than half the women judged benefits of 1 day or 0.1% sufficient to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile. The most important factors in multivariable models were whether the woman had dependants and number of non-specific symptoms attributed to breast cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy since completing treatment. The proportion of variance explained was modest. Preferences were not associated with: scores for anxiety, optimism, and perceived quality and quantity of social support. Explanations for judging negligible benefits sufficient included minimising regret, parenting concerns, doubts about the information provided and feeling that they had no choice. CONCLUSIONS: Preferences were highly variable and influenced by women's unique circumstances and attitudes, but not by their anxiety or optimism scores.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin compared with either modality alone: the impact on amenorrhea, hot flashes, and quality of life in premenopausal patients--the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to compare quality of life (QOL) and menopausal symptoms among premenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, goserelin, or their sequential combination, and to investigate differential effects by age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated QOL data from 874 pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive six courses of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy, ovarian suppression with goserelin for 24 months, or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin. We report QOL data collected during 3 years after random assignment in patients without disease recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, patients receiving goserelin alone showed a marked improvement or less deterioration in QOL measures over the first 6 months than those patients treated with CMF. There were no differences at 3 years after random assignment according to treatment except for hot flashes. As reflected in the hot flashes scores, patients in all three treatment groups experienced induced amenorrhea, but the onset of ovarian function suppression was slightly delayed for patients receiving chemotherapy. Younger patients (< 40 years) who received goserelin alone returned to their premenopausal status at 6 months after the cessation of therapy, while those who received CMF showed marginal changes from their baseline hot flashes scores. CONCLUSION: Age-adjusted risk profiles that consider patient-reported outcomes enable patients to adapt to their disease and treatment, such as considering the trade-offs between delayed endocrine symptoms, but higher risk of permanent menopause with chemotherapy, and immediate but reversible endocrine symptoms with goserelin, in younger premenopausal patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Re-evaluating adjuvant breast cancer trials: assessing hormone receptor status by immunohistochemical versus extraction assays.

BACKGROUND: Tumor levels of steroid hormone receptors, a factor used to select adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer, are currently determined with immunohistochemical assays. These assays have a discordance of 10%-30% with previously used extraction assays. We assessed the concordance and predictive value of hormone receptor status as determined by immunohistochemical and extraction assays on specimens from International Breast Cancer Study Group Trials VIII and IX. These trials predominantly used extraction assays and compared adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy with endocrine therapy alone among pre- and postmenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer. Trial conclusions were that combination therapy provided a benefit to pre- and postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumors but not to ER-positive postmenopausal patients. ER-positive premenopausal patients required further study. METHODS: Tumor specimens from 571 premenopausal and 976 postmenopausal patients on which extraction assays had determined ER and progesterone receptor (PgR) levels before randomization from October 1, 1988, through October 1, 1999, were re-evaluated with an immunohistochemical assay in a central pathology laboratory. The endpoint was disease-free survival. Hazard ratios of recurrence or death for treatment comparisons were estimated with Cox proportional hazards regression models, and discriminatory ability was evaluated with the c index. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Concordance of hormone receptor status determined by both assays ranged from 74% (kappa = 0.48) for PgR among postmenopausal patients to 88% (kappa = 0.66) for ER in postmenopausal patients. Hazard ratio estimates were similar for the association between disease-free survival and ER status (among all patients) or PgR status (among postmenopausal patients) as determined by the two methods. However, among premenopausal patients treated with endocrine therapy alone, the discriminatory ability of PgR status as determined by immunohistochemical assay was statistically significantly better (c index = 0.60 versus 0.51; P = .003) than that determined by extraction assay, and so immunohistochemically determined PgR status could predict disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Trial conclusions in which ER status (for all patients) or PgR status (for postmenopausal patients) was determined by immunohistochemical assay supported those determined by extraction assays. However, among premenopausal patients, trial conclusions drawn from PgR status differed--immunohistochemically determined PgR status could predict response to endocrine therapy, unlike that determined by the extraction assay.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Trends in survival and excess risk of death after diagnosis of cancer in 1980-1996 in New South Wales, Australia.

Survival from almost all cancers has improved during the last 30 years. There is debate over the reasons for the improvement. We examined trends in survival for 28 cancers from 1980 to 1996 in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, with adjustment for disease spread at diagnosis. NSW Central Cancer Registry data were used to estimate 5-year relative survival and relative excess risk of death for patients diagnosed in 1980-84, 1985-88, 1989-92 and 1993-96. Statistical significance of variation in excess deaths between periods of diagnosis was assessed using Poisson regression, with adjustment for age, sex, duration of follow-up, histology and spread of disease at diagnosis. There were statistically significant falls in excess deaths for 20 of the cancers with a 25% fall for all cancers combined. Cancers of the prostate, liver, thyroid, breast, gallbladder, body of uterus, rectum, cervix and ovary had falls of >30%. The falls varied by spread of disease; the largest being in localised and regionally spread tumours. Overall survival, when unadjusted for spread of cancer, generally fell in parallel with that in the specific categories of spread, which implies that stage migration did not contribute importantly to survival trends. While acknowledging the limitations of incomplete data on stage of cancer at diagnosis, we conclude that falls in excess deaths in NSW from 1980 to 1996 are unlikely, for many cancers, to be attributed to earlier diagnosis or stage migration; thus advances in cancer treatment have almost certainly contributed to them.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Tamoxifen after adjuvant chemotherapy for premenopausal women with lymph node-positive breast cancer: International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 13-93.

PURPOSE: The value of adjuvant tamoxifen after chemotherapy for premenopausal women with breast cancer has not been adequately assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1993 and 1999, International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 13-93 enrolled 1,246 assessable premenopausal women with axillary node-positive, operable breast cancer. All patients received chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus either doxorubicin or epirubicin for four courses followed by immediate or delayed classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil for three courses), which was followed by either tamoxifen (20 mg daily) for 5 years or no further treatment. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Tumors were classified as estrogen receptor (ER) -positive (n = 735, 59%) if immunohistochemical (IHC) or ligand-binding assays (LBA) were clearly positive. The ER-negative group included all other tumors (n = 511, 41%). A subset of the ER-negative group was defined as ER absent (n = 108, 9%) if IHC staining was none or if the LBA result was 0 fmol/mg cytosol protein. The median follow-up time was 7 years. RESULTS: Tamoxifen improved DFS in the ER-positive cohort (hazard ratio [HR] for tamoxifen v no tamoxifen = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.75; P < .0001) but not in the ER-negative cohort (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.35; P = .89). Tamoxifen had a detrimental effect on patients with ER-absent tumors compared with no tamoxifen in an unplanned exploratory analysis (HR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.03 to 4.29; P = .04). Patients with ER-positive tumors who achieved chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea had a significantly improved outcome (HR for amenorrhea v no amenorrhea = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86; P = .004), whether or not they received tamoxifen. CONCLUSION: Tamoxifen after adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved treatment outcome in premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive disease, but its use as adjuvant therapy for patients with ER-negative tumors is not recommended.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Ocular toxicity during adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for early breast cancer: results from International Breast Cancer Study Group trials.

BACKGROUND: Others have reported ocular toxicity after adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy, but this study looked at ocular toxicity in similarly treated patients from large randomized clinical trials. METHODS: Information was retrieved on incidence and timing of ocular toxicity from the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) database of 4948 eligible patients randomized to receive tamoxifen or toremifene alone or in combination with chemotherapy (either concurrently or sequentially). Case reports of patients with ocular toxicity were evaluated to determine whether ocular toxicity occurred during chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. Additional information was obtained from participating institutions for patients in whom ocular toxicity occurred after chemotherapy but during administration of tamoxifen or toremifene. RESULTS: Ocular toxicity was reported in 538 of 4948 (10.9%) patients during adjuvant treatment, mainly during chemotherapy. Forty-five of 4948 (0.9%) patients had ocular toxicity during hormone therapy alone, but only 30 (0.6%) patients had ocular toxicity reported either without receiving any chemotherapy or beyond 3 months after completing chemotherapy and, thus, possibly related to tamoxifen or toremifene. In 3 cases, retinal alterations, without typical aspects of tamoxifen toxicity, were reported; 4 patients had cataract (2 bilateral), 12 impaired visual acuity, 10 ocular irritation, 1 optical neuritis, and the rest had other symptoms. CONCLUSION: Ocular toxicity during adjuvant therapy is a common side effect mainly represented by irritative symptoms due to chemotherapy. By contrast, ocular toxicity during hormonal therapy is rare and does not appear to justify a regular program of ocular examination. However, patients should be informed of this rare side effect so that they may seek prompt ophthalmic evaluation for ocular complaints.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Multicycle dose-intensive chemotherapy for women with high-risk primary breast cancer: results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 15-95.

PURPOSE: To compare adjuvant dose-intensive epirubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy administered with filgrastim and progenitor cell support (DI-EC) with standard-dose anthracycline-based chemotherapy (SD-CT) for patients with early-stage breast cancer and a high risk of relapse, defined as stage II disease with 10 or more positive axillary nodes; or an estrogen receptor-negative or stage III tumor with five or more positive axillary nodes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred forty-four patients were randomized after surgery to receive seven cycles of SD-CT over 22 weeks, or three cycles of DI-EC (epirubicin 200 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 4 gm/m2 with filgrastim and progenitor cell support) over 6 weeks. All patients were assigned tamoxifen at the completion of chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 5.8 years (range, 3 to 8.4 years), 188 DFS events had occurred (DI-EC, 86 events; SD-CT, 102 events). The 5-year DFS was 52% for DI-EC and 43% for SD-CT, with hazard ratio of DI-EC compared with SD-CT of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.58 to 1.02; P = .07). The 5-year overall survival was 70% for DI-EC and 61% for SD-CT, with a hazard ratio of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.11; P = .17). There were eight cases (5%) of anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy (two fatal) among those who received DI-EC. Women with hormone receptor-positive tumors benefited significantly from DI-EC. CONCLUSION: There was a trend in favor of DI-EC with respect to disease-free survival. A larger trial or meta-analysis will be required to reveal the true effect of dose-intensive therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aromatase inhibitor letrozole is a more effective treatment for metastatic breast cancer and more effective in the neoadjuvant setting than tamoxifen. We compared letrozole with tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for steroid-hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women. METHODS: The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a randomized, phase 3, double-blind trial that compared five years of treatment with various adjuvant endocrine therapy regimens in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer: letrozole, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole. This analysis compares the two groups assigned to receive letrozole initially with the two groups assigned to receive tamoxifen initially; events and follow-up in the sequential-treatment groups were included up to the time that treatments were switched. RESULTS: A total of 8010 women with data that could be assessed were enrolled, 4003 in the letrozole group and 4007 in the tamoxifen group. After a median follow-up of 25.8 months, 351 events had occurred in the letrozole group and 428 events in the tamoxifen group, with five-year disease-free survival estimates of 84.0 percent and 81.4 percent, respectively. As compared with tamoxifen, letrozole significantly reduced the risk of an event ending a period of disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.70 to 0.93; P=0.003), especially the risk of distant recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.88; P=0.001). Thromboembolism, endometrial cancer, and vaginal bleeding were more common in the tamoxifen group. Women given letrozole had a higher incidence of skeletal and cardiac events and of hypercholesterolemia. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer, adjuvant treatment with letrozole, as compared with tamoxifen, reduced the risk of recurrent disease, especially at distant sites. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004205.)

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Randomized trial comparing axillary clearance versus no axillary clearance in older patients with breast cancer: first results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 10-93.

PURPOSE: Axillary clearance in early breast cancer aims to improve locoregional control and provide staging information but is associated with undesirable morbidity. We therefore investigated whether avoiding axillary surgery in older women would result in improved quality of life (QL) with similar disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1993 and 2002, women > or = 60 years old with clinically node-negative operable breast cancer in whom adjuvant tamoxifen was considered indicated regardless of pathologic nodal status were randomly assigned to primary surgery plus axillary clearance (Sx + Ax) followed by tamoxifen (Tam) versus Sx without Ax followed by Tam for 5 consecutive years. The primary end point was QL reported by the patient and by physician assessment. RESULTS: A total of 473 patients (234 to Sx + Ax, 239 to Sx) were randomly assigned. The median age was 74 years; 80% had estrogen receptor-positive disease. In both the patients' subjective assessment of their QL and the physicians' perception of the patients' QL, the largest adverse QL effects of Ax were observed from baseline to the first postoperative assessment, but the differences tended to disappear in 6 to 12 months. At a median follow-up of 6.6 years, results for Sx + Ax and Sx yielded similar DFS (6-year DFS, 67% v 66%; hazard ratio [HR] Sx + Ax/Sx, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.42; P = .69) and OS (6-year OS, 75% v 73%; HR Sx + Ax/Sx, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.46; P = .77). CONCLUSION: Avoiding axillary clearance for women > or = 60 years old who have clinically node-negative disease and receive Tam for endocrine-responsive disease yields similar efficacy with better early QL.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Prognostic value of extracapsular tumor spread for locoregional control in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: long-term observations from International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine retrospectively whether extracapsular spread (ECS) might identify a subgroup that could benefit from radiotherapy after mastectomy, especially patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes (LN1-3+). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomized 1,475 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer to three, six, or nine courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil). After a review of all pathology forms, 933 patients (63%) had information on the presence or absence of ECS. ECS was present in 49.5%. The median follow-up was 10 years. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, ECS was associated with worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). In multivariate analyses adjusting for tumor size, vessel invasion, surgery type, and age group, ECS remained significant (DFS: hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.34 to 1.93; P < .0001; OS: 1.67; 95% CI, 1.34 to 2.08; P < .0001). However, ECS was not significant when the number of positive nodes was added. The locoregional failure rate +/- distant failure (LRF +/- distant failure) within 10 years was estimated at 19% (+/- 2%) without ECS, versus 27% (+/- 2%) with ECS. The difference was statistically significant in univariate analyses, but not after adjusting for the number of positive nodes. No independent effect of ECS on DFS, OS, or LRF could be confirmed within the subgroup of 382 patients with LN1-3+ treated with mastectomy without radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support an independent prognostic value of ECS, nor its use as an indication for irradiation in premenopausal patients with LN1-3+ treated with classical CMF. However, we could not examine whether extensive ECS is of prognostic importance.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Site of primary tumor has a prognostic role in operable breast cancer: the international breast cancer study group experience.

PURPOSE: Cancer presenting at the medial site of the breast may have a worse prognosis compared with tumors located in external quadrants. For medial tumors, axillary lymph node staging may not accurately reflect the metastatic potential of the disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eight-thousand four-hundred twenty-two patients randomly assigned to International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials between 1978 and 1999 were classified as medial site (1,622; 19%) or lateral, central, and other sites (6,800; 81%). Median follow-up was 11 years. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was observed for patients with medial tumors versus those with nonmedial tumors in disease-free survival (DFS; 10-year DFS, 46% v 48%; HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.18; P = .01) and overall survival (10-year OS 59% v 61%; HR, 1.09; 1.01 to 1.19; P = .04). This difference increased after adjustment for other prognostic factors (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.32 for DFS; and HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.35 for OS; both P = .0001). The risk of relapse for patients with medial presentation was largest for the node-negative cohort and for patients with tumors larger than 2 cm. In the subgroup of 2,931 patients with negative axillary lymph nodes, 10-year DFS was 61% v 67%, and OS was 73% v 80% for medial versus nonmedial sites, respectively (HR 1.33; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.54; P = .0001 for DFS; and HR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.67; P = .0003 for OS). CONCLUSION: Tumor site has a significant prognostic utility, especially for axillary lymph node-negative disease, that should be considered in therapeutic algorithms. New staging procedures such as biopsy of the sentinel internal mammary nodes or novel imaging methods should be further studied in patients with medial tumors.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Cancer prevention: a global perspective.

This review will be restricted to measures aimed at primary prevention of cancer; reduction of the death rate through screening will not be covered. In many instances, cancer prevention is just one outcome of the benefits of good health practices, which may also benefit cardiovascular, lung, infectious, and metabolic diseases. Thus, reducing tobacco smoking will bring benefits in heart disease, neonatal and maternal health, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease as well as a variety of cancers, while dietary advice appropriate to cancer risk reduction will bring benefits in diabetes, stroke, kidney, and heart disease.

Developing Countries↗
PubMed2004

A randomized trial of exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen, taken for five years, is the standard adjuvant treatment for postmenopausal women with primary, estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Despite this treatment, however, some patients have a relapse. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial to test whether, after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy, switching to exemestane was more effective than continuing tamoxifen therapy for the remainder of the five years of treatment. The primary end point was disease-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 4742 patients enrolled, 2362 were randomly assigned to switch to exemestane, and 2380 to continue to receive tamoxifen. After a median follow-up of 30.6 months, 449 first events (local or metastatic recurrence, contralateral breast cancer, or death) were reported--183 in the exemestane group and 266 in the tamoxifen group. The unadjusted hazard ratio in the exemestane group as compared with the tamoxifen group was 0.68 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.82; P<0.001 by the log-rank test), representing a 32 percent reduction in risk and corresponding to an absolute benefit in terms of disease-free survival of 4.7 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 2.6 to 6.8) at three years after randomization. Overall survival was not significantly different in the two groups, with 93 deaths occurring in the exemestane group and 106 in the tamoxifen group. Severe toxic effects of exemestane were rare. Contralateral breast cancer occurred in 20 patients in the tamoxifen group and 9 in the exemestane group (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Exemestane therapy after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy significantly improved disease-free survival as compared with the standard five years of tamoxifen treatment.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2004

Toremifene and tamoxifen are equally effective for early-stage breast cancer: first results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trials 12-93 and 14-93.

BACKGROUND: Toremifene is a chlorinated derivative of tamoxifen, developed to improve its risk-benefit profile. The International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) conducted two complementary randomized trials for peri- and postmenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer to compare toremifene versus tamoxifen as the endocrine agent and simultaneously investigate a chemotherapy-oriented question. This is the first report of the endocrine comparison after a median follow-up of 5.5 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 1035 patients were available for analysis: 75% had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive primary tumors, the median number of involved axillary lymph nodes was three and 81% received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Toremifene and tamoxifen yielded similar disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS): 5-year DFS rates of 72% and 69%, respectively [risk ratio (RR)=0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.76-1.18]; 5-year OS rates of 85% and 81%, respectively (RR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.78-1.36). Similar outcomes were observed in the ER-positive cohort. Toxicities were similar in the two treatment groups with very few women (<1%) experiencing severe thromboembolic or cerebrovascular complications. Quality of life results were also similar. Nine patients developed early stage endometrial cancer (toremifene, six; tamoxifen, three). CONCLUSIONS: Toremifene is a valid and safe alternative to tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Although chemotherapy and ovarian function suppression are both effective adjuvant therapies for patients with early-stage breast cancer, little is known of the efficacy of their sequential combination. In an International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) randomized clinical trial (Trial VIII) for pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer, we compared sequential chemotherapy followed by the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist goserelin with each modality alone. METHODS: From March 1990 through October 1999, 1063 patients stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status and radiotherapy plan were randomly assigned to receive goserelin for 24 months (n = 346), six courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy (n = 360), or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin (CMF --> goserelin; n = 357). A fourth arm (no adjuvant treatment) with 46 patients was discontinued in 1992. Tumors were classified as ER-negative (30%), ER-positive (68%), or ER status unknown (3%). Twenty percent of patients were aged 39 years or younger. The median follow-up was 7 years. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Patients with ER-negative tumors achieved better disease-free survival if they received CMF (5-year DFS for CMF = 84%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 91%; 5-year DFS for CMF --> goserelin = 88%, 95% CI = 82% to 94%) than if they received goserelin alone (5-year DFS = 73%, 95% CI = 64% to 81%). By contrast, for patients with ER-positive disease, chemotherapy alone and goserelin alone provided similar outcomes (5-year DFS for both treatment groups = 81%, 95% CI = 76% to 87%), whereas sequential therapy (5-year DFS = 86%, 95% CI = 82% to 91%) provided a statistically nonsignificant improvement compared with either modality alone, primarily because of the results among younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal women with ER-negative (i.e., endocrine nonresponsive), lymph node-negative breast cancer should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with ER-positive (i.e., endocrine responsive) disease, the combination of chemotherapy with ovarian function suppression or other endocrine agents, and the use of endocrine therapy alone should be studied.

Adult↗