A Systematic Overview of Chemotherapy Effects in Breast Cancer

References

• Early Breast Cancer Treatment Collaborative Group. Sys-temic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cyto-toxic, or immune therapy. Lancet 1992; 339: 1–15, 71–85. (Ml)
   Google Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Treatment Collaborative Group. Poly-chemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 1998; 352: 930-42. (M1/29769)
   Google Scholar
• Thurfjell E, Lindgren A. Breast cancer survival rates with mammographic screening similar favorable survival rates for women younger and those older than 50 years. Radiol-ogy 1996; 201: 421–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Aas T, Borresen AL, Geisler S, et al. Specific p53 mutations are associated with de novo resistance to doxorubicin in breast cancer patients. Nature Med 1996; 2: 811–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergh J, Norberg T, Sjogren S, et al. Complete sequencing of the p53 gene provides prognostic information in breast cancer patients, particularly in relation to adjuvant systemic therapy and radiotherapy. Nature Med 1995; 1: 1029–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overgaard J, Yilmaz M, Guldberg P, et al. TP53 mutation is an independent prognostic marker for poor outcome in both node-negative and node-positive breast cancer. Acta Oncol 2000; 39: 327–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Révillion F, Bonneterre J, Peyrat J. ERBB2 oncogene in human breast cancer and its clinical significance. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 791–808.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Treatment Collaborative Group. Effects of radiotherapy and surgery in early breast cancer: an overview of the randomized trials. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1444–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arriagada R, Le MG. Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer. The treatment of lymp node areas. Acta Oncol 2000; 39: 295–305.
   Google Scholar
• Cuzick J, Stewart H, Rutqvist L, et al. Cause-specific mor-tality in long-term survivors of breast cancer who partici-pated in trials of radiotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 447–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansson T, Inganas M, Sjogren S, et al. p53 status predicts survival in breast cancer patients treated with or without postoperative radiotherapy: A novel hypothesis based on clinical findings. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2745–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overgaard M. The role of postmastectomy radiotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. In: 5th International Meeting on Progress in Radio-Oncology. Bologna, Italy. Manduzzi Editoro, S.p.A. 1995; 41–5.
   Google Scholar
• Overgaard M, Hansen P, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 949–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ragaz J, Jackson S, Le N, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in node-positive premenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 956–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whelan TJ, Julian J, Wright J, et al. Does locoregional radiation therapy improve survival in breast cancer? A meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1220–9. (Ml)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broder L, Tormey D. Combination chemotherapy of car-cinoma of the breast. Cancer Treat Rev 1974; 1: 183–203.
   Google Scholar
• Mouridsen H. Systemic therapy of advanced breast cancer. Drugs 1992; 44 (Suppl 4): 17–28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wong K, Henderson I. Management of metastatic breast cancer. World J Surg 1994; 18: 98–111.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldhirsch A, Wood W, Senn HJ, et al. Meeting highlights: international consensus panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: 1441–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine M, Bramwell V, Pritchard K, et al. Randomized trial of intensive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrex-ate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2651–8. (CLL 710)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouridsen H, Andersen J, Andersson M, et al. Adjuvant anthracycline in breast cancer. Improved outcome in pre-menopausal patients by substituting methotrexate in the CMF combination with epirubicin. 35th ASCO Annual Meeting. Atlanta, Georgia. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999 (Abstr 254). (C2/1120)
   Google Scholar
• Henderson I, Berry D, Demetri G, et al. Improved disease-free and overall survival from the addition of sequential paclitaxel but not from the escalation of doxorubicin dose level in the adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with node-positive primary breast cancer. In: Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting (M. Perry, ed.). Los Angeles, CA. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17: (Abstr 390A) 101a. (C2/3170)
   Google Scholar
• Valagussa P, Molitemi A, Terenziani M, et al. Second malignancies following CMF-based adjuvant chemotherapy in resectable breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 803-8. (R1/2465)
   Google Scholar
• Arriagada R, Rutqvist L. Adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer and incidence of new primary malignancies. Lancet 1991; 338: 535-8. (R1/1113)
   Google Scholar
• Diamandidou E, Buzdar U, Smith T, et al. Treatment-re-lated leukemia in breast cancer patients treated with fluorou-racil-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide combination adjuvant chemotherapy: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Experience. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 2722–30. (R1/1474)
   Google Scholar
• Bergh J, Wiklund T, Erikstein B, et al. Dosage of adjuvant G-CSF (filgrastim)-supported FEC polychemotherapy based on equivalent haematological toxicity to high-risk breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol 1998; 9: 403–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Scandinavian Breast Cancer Study 9401. Results from a randomized adjuvant breast cancer study with high-dose chemotherapy with CTCb supported by autologous bone marrow stem cells vs dose escalated and tailored FEC ther-apy. 35th Annual meeting Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; (Abstr 3). (C1/525)
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen-Bjergaard J, Pedersen M, Myhre J, et al. High risk of therapy-related leukemia after BEAM chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for previously treated lymphomas is mainly related to primary chemotherapy and not to the BEAM-transplantation procedure. Leukemia 1997; 11: 1654–60.
   Google Scholar
• Lippman M, Sorace R, Bagley C, et al. Treatment of locally advanced breast cancer using primary induction chemother-apy with hormonal synchronization followed by radiation therapy with or without debulking surgery. NCI Monogr 1986; 1: 153–9.
   Google Scholar
• Valero V, Buzdar A, Hortobagyi G. Locally advanced breast cancer. Oncologist 1996; 1: 8–17.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steinthal C. Dauerheilung des Brustkrebses. Beitr Z Klin Chir 1905; 47: 1226.
   Google Scholar
• Camp E. Inflammatory carcinoma of the breast: The case for conservatism. Am J Surg 1976; 131: 583–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swain S, Lippman M. Treatment of patients with inflamma-tory breast cancer. In: de Vita V, Hellman S, Rosenberg S, eds. Important Advances in Oncology. Philadelphia: JB Lip-pincott Company, 1989: 129–50.
   Google Scholar
• Treves N. The inoperability of inflammatory carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1959; 109: 240–2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haagensen C. Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia: Saun-ders, 1971: 583–4.
   Google Scholar
• Rouesse J, Freidman S, Sarrazin D, et al. Primary chemotherapy in the treatment of inflammatory breast car-cinoma. a study of 230 cases from the Institut Gustave-Roussy. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 1765–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palangie T, Mosseri V, Mihura J, et al. Prognostic factors in inflammatory breast cancer and therapeutic implications. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 921–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perloff M, Lesnick G, Korzun A, et al. Combination chemotherapy with mastectomy or radiotherapy for stage III breast carcinoma: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 261-9. (C2/113)
   Google Scholar
• De Lena M, Varini M, Zucali R, et al. Multimodal treat-ment for locally advanced breast cancer. Result of chemotherapy-radiotherapy vs chemotherapy-surgery. Can-cer Clin Trials 1981; 4: 229-36. (C2/132)
   Google Scholar
• Gazet JC, Ford H, Coombes R. Randomised trial of chemotherapy vs endocrine therapy in patients presenting with locally advanced breast cancer (a pilot study). Br J Cancer 1991; 63: 279-82. (C3/60)
   Google Scholar
• Takatsuka Y, Yayoi E, Kobayashi T, et al. Neoadjuvant intra-arterial chemotherapy in locally advanced breast can-cer: A prospective randomized study. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1994; 24: 20-5. (C3/76)
   Google Scholar
• Powles T, Hickish T, Markris A, et al. Randomized trial of chemoendocrine therapy started before or after surgery for treatment of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 547-52. (C2/212)
   Google Scholar
• Scholl S, Fourguet A, Asselain B, et al. Neoadjuvant vs adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tu-mours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: Preliminary results of a randomised trial: S6. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 645-52. (C2/414)
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preopera-tive chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancen findings from NSABP B-18. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 2483-93. (C1/1523)
   Google Scholar
• Mauriac L, Durand M, Avril A, et al. Effects of primary chemotherapy in conservative treatment of breast cancer patients with operable tumours larger than 3 cm. Results of a randomized trial in a single centre. Ann Oncol 1991; 2: 347-54. (C2/272)
   Google Scholar
• Semiglazov V, Topuzov E, Bavli J, et al. Primary (neoadju-vant) chemotherapy and radiotherapy compared with pri-mary radiotherapy alone in stage IIb-IIIa breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 591-5. (C2/271)
   Google Scholar
• Papaioannou A, Lissaios B, Vasilaros S, et al. Pre- and postoperative chemoendocrine treatment with or without postoperative radiotherapy for locally advanced breast can-cer. Cancer 1983; 51: 1284-90. (C3/184)
   Google Scholar
• Cocconi G, di Blasio B, Bisagni G, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemotherapy and endocrine therapy in locally advanced breast carcinoma. A prospective, random-ized study. Am J Clin Oncol 1990; 13: 226-32. (C3/49)
   Google Scholar
• Rodger A, Jack W, Hardman P, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: report of phase II study and subsequent phase III trial. Br J Cancer 1992; 65: 761-5. (C3/52)
   Google Scholar
• Rubens R, Bartelink H, Engelsman E, et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: the contribution of cytotoxic and endocrine treatment to radiotherapy. An EORTC Breast Cancer Co-operative Group Trial (10792). Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1989; 25: 667–78. (C1/410)
   Google Scholar
• Bartelink H, Rubens R, van der Schueren E, et al. Hormonal therapy prolongs survival in irradiated locally advanced breast cancer: a European organization for research and treatment of cancer randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 207-15. (C1/410)
   Google Scholar
• Schaake-Koning C, van der Linden E, Hart G, et al. Adju-vant chemo- and hormonal therapy in locally advanced breast cancer: randomized clinical study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985; 11: 1759–63. (C2/118)
   Google Scholar
• Ross M. Improved survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving combination chemotherapy. Cancer 1985; 55: 341-6. (R1/671)
   Google Scholar
• Todd M, Shag M, Cadman E. Survival of women with metastatic breast cancer at Yale from 1920 to 1980. J Clin Oncol 1983; 1: 406–8. (R1/574)
   Google Scholar
• Patel J, Nemoto T, Vezeridis M, et al. Does more intense palliative treatment improve overall survival in metastatic breast cancer patients? Cancer 1986; 57: 567-70. (R2/483)
   Google Scholar
• Paterson A, Szafran O, Cornish F, et al. Effect of chemother-apy on survival in metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1981; 1: 357-63. (R1/246)
   Google Scholar
• Powles T, Coombes R, Smith I, et al. Failure of chemother-apy to prolong survival in a group of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Lancet 1980; 1: 580-2. (R1/160)
   Google Scholar
• A'Hern R, Ebbs S, Baum M. Does chemotherapy improve survival in advanced breast cancer? A statistical overview. Br J Cancer 1988; 57: 615-8. (M1/6056)
   Google Scholar
• Cold S, Jensen N, Brincker H, et al. The influence of chemotherapy on survival after recurrence in breast cancer-A population-based study of patients treated in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 1146-52. (R1/769)
   Google Scholar
• Fossati R, Confalonieri C, Toni V, et al. Cytotoxic and hormonal treatment for metastatic breast cancer: a systemic review of published randomized trial involving 31510 women. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3439-60. (M1/31510)
   Google Scholar
• Priestman T, Baum M, Jones V, et al. Treatment and survival in advanced breast cancer. Br Med J 1978; 2: 1673-4. (C3/100)
   Google Scholar
• Glick J, Creech R, Toni S, et al. Randomized clinical trial of tamoxifen plus sequential CMF chemotherapy vs tamoxifen alone in postmenopausal women with advanced breast can-cer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1981; 1: 59-68. (C2/101)
   Google Scholar
• Rossof A, Gelman R, Creech R. Randomized evaluation of combination chemotherapy vs. observation alone following response or stabilization after oophorectomy for metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5: 253-9. (C3/34)
   Google Scholar
• Kiang D, Gay J, Goldman A, et al. A randomized trial of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1985; 313: 1241-6. (C3/122)
   Google Scholar
• Bezwoda R, Derman D, De Moor N, et al. Treatment of metastatic breast cancer in estrogen receptor positive patients. A randomized trial comparing tamoxifen alone vs tamoxifen plus CMF. Cancer 1982; 50: 2747-50. (C3/52)
   Google Scholar
• Dixon A, Jackson L, Chan S, et al. A randomised trial of second-line hormone vs single agent chemotherapy in tamox-ifen resistant advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1992; 66: 402-4. (C3/60)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson G, Holcroft C, Gelman R, et al. Ten-year follow-up study of premenopausal women with metastatic breast can-cer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1453-8. (C2/89)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson G, Gelman R, Tormey D, et al. Treatment of metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women using CAF with or without oophorectomy: An Eastern cooperative on-cology group study. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 881–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cavalli F, Beer M, Martz G, et al. Concurrent or sequential use of cytotoxic chemotherapy and hormone treatment in advanced breast cancen report of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research. Br Med J 1983; 286: 5-8. (C2/464)
   Google Scholar
• Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group. A randomized trial in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer comparing endocrine and cytotoxic therapy given sequentially or in combination. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 186-93. (C1/339)
   Google Scholar
• Wils J, Bron H, van Lange L, et al. A randomized compar-ative trial of combined vs alternating therapy with cytostatic drugs and high-dose medroxyprogesteron acetate in advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1985; 56: 1325-31. (C2/155)
   Google Scholar
• Viladiu P, Alonso M, Avella A, et al. Chemotherapy vs chemotherapy plus hormonotherapy in postmenopausal ad-vanced breast cancer patients. A randomized trial. Cancer 1985; 56: 2745-50. (C3/117)
   Google Scholar
• CMEA Cooperative Treatment Group. Clinical controlled trial in advanced breast cancer. CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) vs CMF T (cyclophos-phamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, tamoxifen). Neo-plasma 1984; 32: 381–7. (C3/153)
   Google Scholar
• Perry M, Kardinal C, Korzun A, et al. Chemohormonal therapy in advanced carcinoma of the breast: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Protocol 8081. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 1534-45. (C1/474)
   Google Scholar
• Kardinal C, Perry M, Weinberg V, et al. Chemoendocrine therapy vs chemotherapy alone for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: preliminary report of a randomized study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1983; 3: 365-72. (C2/246)
   Google Scholar
• Tormey D, Falkson G, Crowley J, et al. Dibromodulcitol and adriamycin / - tamoxifen in advanced breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1982a; 5: 33-9. (C2/135)
   Google Scholar
• Tashiro H, Nomura Y. Mitomycin C, methotrexate, and vincristine with medroxyprogesterone acetate or prednisolone for doxorubicin resistant advanced breast cancer-a random-ized control study. Anticancer Res 1995; 15: 2229-38. (C2/ 108)
   Google Scholar
• Gundersen S, Kvinnsland S, Klepp O, et al. Chemotherapy with or without high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate in oestrogen-receptor-negative advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28: 390-4. (C2/142)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson CI, Falkson HC, Falkson G. High-dose medrox-yprogesterone acetate plus mitomycin-C or vindesine in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1988; 11: 431-4. (C3/40)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson CI, Falkson G, Falkson CB, et al. A randomized trial of mitomycin-C (M) vs mitomycin-C plus high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate (MMPA) in the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1993; 16: 14-7. (C3/76)
   Google Scholar
• Gundersen S, Hannisdal E, Lundgren S, et al. Weekly doxorubicin with or without high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate in hormone-resistant advanced breast cancer. A ran-domised study. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 1775-8. (C2/218)
   Google Scholar
• Rubens R, Begent R, Knight R, et al. Combined cytotoxic and progestogen therapy for advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1978; 42: 1680-6. (C2/77)
   Google Scholar
• Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Rosso R, et al. Chemotherapy with or without tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with late breast cancer. A randomized study. J Steroid Biochem 1985; 23: 1123-7. (C2/81)
   Google Scholar
• Mouridsen H, Rose C, Engelsmann E, et al. Combined cytotoxic and endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. A randomized EORTC study of CMF vs CMF tamoxifen. J Steroid Biochem 1985; 23: 1141-6. (C1/263)
   Google Scholar
• Cocconi G, De Lisi V, Boni C, et al. Chemotherapy vs combination of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer. A prospective randomized study. Cancer 1983; 51: 581-8. (C1/145)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson CI, Falkson G, Falkson CB, et al. Mitomycin C ± high-dose medroxyprogesterone vs cyclophosphamide doxorubicin plus fluorouracil as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Oncology 1992; 49: 418-21. (C3/ 34)
   Google Scholar
• Ahmann D, O'Connell M, Hahn R, et al. An evaluation of early or delayed adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer undergoing oophorec-tomy. N Engl J Med 1977; 297: 356-60. (C2/75)
   Google Scholar
• Oberfield R, Cady B, Pazianos A, et al. Adrenalectomy-oophorectomy and combined chemotherapy for carcinoma of the breast with metastases. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1979; 148: 881-6. (C3/31)
   Google Scholar
• Buzdar A, Legha S, Blumenschein G, et al. Peptichemio vs melphalan (L-PAM) in advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1982; 49: 1767-70. (C3/56)
   Google Scholar
• Cowan J, Osborne C, Neidhart J, et al. A randomized trial of doxorubicin, mitoxantrone and bisantrene in advanced breast cancer (a South West Oncology Group Study). Invest New Drugs 1985; 3: 149–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dieras V, Marty M, Tubiana N, et al. Phase II randomized study of paclitaxel vs mitomycin in advanced breast cancer. Semin Oncol 1995; 22: 33-9. (C1/81)
   Google Scholar
• Jain K, Casper E, Geller N, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of epirubicin and doxorubicin in patients with advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1985; 3: 818-26. (C3/54)
   Google Scholar
• Jones S, Winer E, Vogel C, et al. Randomized comparison of vinorelbine and melphalan in anthracycline-refractory ad-vanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2567-74. (C1/183)
   Google Scholar
• Lawton P, Spittle M, Ostrowski M, et al. A comparison of doxorubicin, epirubicin and mitozantrone as single agents in advanced breast carcinoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 1993; 5: 80-4. (C3/87)
   Google Scholar
• Lober J, Mouridsen H, Christiansen I, et al. A phase III trial prednimustine (LEO 1031) to chlorambucil plus pred-nisolone in advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1983; 52: 1570-6. (C3/201)
   Google Scholar
• Neidhart J, Gochnour D, Roach R, et al. A comparison of mitoxantrone and doxorubicin in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 672-7. (C2/90)
   Google Scholar
• Perez D, Harvey V, Robinson B, et al. A randomized comparison of single-agent doxorubicin and epirubicin as first-line cytotoxic therapy in advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 2148-52. (C1/141)
   Google Scholar
• Yau J, Yap YY, Buzdar A, et al. A comparative randomized trial of vinca alkaloids in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer 1985; 55: 337-40. (C3/131)
   Google Scholar
• Gundersen S, Kvinnsland S, Klepp O, et al. Weekly adri-amycin vs. 4-epidoxorubicin every second week in advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial. Eur J Cancer 1990; 26: 45–8. (C2/166)
   Google Scholar
• Canellos G, Pocock S, Taylor S, et al. Combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. Prospective comparison of multiple drug therapy with L-Phenylalanine mustard. Cancer 1976; 38: 1882-6. (C1/184)
   Google Scholar
• Carmo-Pereira J, Costa Oliveira F, Henriques E. Single-drug vs combination cytotoxic chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: a randomized study. Eur J Cancer 1980; 16: 162 1–5. (C1/135)
   Google Scholar
• Mouridsen H, Palshof F, Brahm M, et al. Evaluation of single-drug vs multiple-drug chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1977; 61: 47-50. (C1/51)
   Google Scholar
• Rubens R, Knight R, Hayward J. Chemotherapy of ad-vanced breast cancen a controlled randomized trial of cy-clophosphamide vs a four-drug combination. Br J Cancer 1975; 32: 730-6. (C2/99)
   Google Scholar
• Ahmann D, Schaid D, Bisel H, et al. The effect on survival of initial chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: poly-chemotherapy vs single drug. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 1928-32. (C3/131)
   Google Scholar
• Andersson M, Daugaard S, von der Maase H, et al. Doxoru-bicin vs mitomycin vs doxorubicin plus mitomycin in ad-vanced breast cancer: a randomized study. Cancer Treat Rep 1986; 70: 1181-6. (C2/89)
   Google Scholar
• Fraser S, Dobbs H, Ebbs S, et al. Combination or mild single agent chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer? CMF vs epirubicin measuring quality of life. Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 402-6. (C2/40)
   Google Scholar
• French Epirubicin Study Group. A prospective randomized trial comparing epirubicin monochemotherapy to two fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, and epirubicin regimens dif-fering in epirubicin dose in advanced breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1991;9:305-12. (C1/412)
   Google Scholar
• Gundersen S, Kvinnsland S, Klepp O, et al. Weekly adri-amycin vs VAC in advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1986; 22: 1431-4. (C2/128)
   Google Scholar
• Hoogstraten B, George S, Samal B, et al. Combination chemotherapy and adriamycin in patients with advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1976; 38: 13-20. (C2/297)
   Google Scholar
• Ingle J, Green S, Brunk S, et al. Randomized clinical trial of doxorubicin alone or combined with mitolactol in women with advanced breast cancer and prior chemotherapy expo-sure. Am J Clin Oncol 1985; 8: 275-82. (C1/158)
   Google Scholar
• Ingle J, Mailliard J, Schaid D, et al. Randomized trial of doxorubicin alone or combined with vincristine and mito-mycin C in women with metastatic breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1989; 12: 474-80. (C1/185)
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen D, Dombernowsky P, Skovsgaard T, et al. Epiru-bicin or epirubicin and vindesine in advanced breast cancer. A phase III study. Ann Oncol 1990; 1: 275-80. (C1/143)
   Google Scholar
• Steiner R, Stewart J, Cantwell B, et al. Adriamycin alone or combined with vincristine in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1983; 19: 1553-7. (C2/119)
   Google Scholar
• Vaughn C, Green S, O'Bryan R, et al. VP-16 ± adriamycin vs. adriamycin alone in advanced adenocarcinoma of the breast, phase II, a randomized trial: a Southwest Oncology Group Study. Med Pediatr Oncol 1988; 16: 312–9. (C2/122)
   Google Scholar
• Cooper R. Combination chemotherapy in hormone resistant breast cancer. In: Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res, 1969. (R3/60)
   Google Scholar
• Muss H, White D, Cooper M, et al. Combination chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: a randomized trial comparing a three- vs a five-drug program. Arch Intern Med 1977; 137: 1711-4. (C3/72)
   Google Scholar
• Segaloff A, Henkey B, Carter A, et al. An evaluation of the effect of vincristine added to cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorou-racil, methotrexate, and prednisone in advanced breast can-cer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1985; 5: 311-9. (C1/427)
   Google Scholar
• Marschke R Jr, Ingle J, Schaid D, et al. Randomized clinical trial of CFP vs CMFP in women with metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1989; 63: 1931-7. (C1/345)
   Google Scholar
• Yosef H, Slater A, Keen C, et al. Prednimustine (Sterecyt) vs cyclophosphamide both in combination with methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of advanced breast can-cer. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 1100-5. (C1/153)
   Google Scholar
• Cocconi G, Bisagni G, Bacchi M, et al. Cisplatin and etoposide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 664-9. (C1/140)
   Google Scholar
• Engelsman E, Klijn J, Rubens R, et al. Classical' CMF vs a 3-weekly intravenous CMF schedule in postmenopausal pa-tients with advanced breast cancer. An EORTC breast can-cer co-operative group phase III trial (10808). Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 966–70. (C1/332)
   Google Scholar
• Carmo-Pereira J, Costa F, Henriques E, et al. A randomized trial of two regimens of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone in advanced breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1986; 17: 87–90. (C3/107)
   Google Scholar
• Ahmann D, Bisel H, Eagan R, et al. Controlled evaluation of adriamycin (NSC-123127) in patients with disseminated breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Rep 1974; 58: 877-82. (C3/48)
   Google Scholar
• Ahmann D, Schaid D, Ingle J, et al. A randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone vs cy-clophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, and presnisone in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1991; 14: 179-83. (C2/94)
   Google Scholar
• Aisner J, Weinberg V, Perloff M, et al. Chemotherapy vs chemoimmunotherapy (CAF v CAFVP v CMF each ± / - MER) for metastatic carcinoma of the breast: a CALGB study. Cancer and Leukemia Group B. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 1523-33. (C1/432)
   Google Scholar
• Bennett J, Muss H, Doroshow J, et al. A randomized multicenter trial comparing mitoxantrone, cyclophos-phamide, and fluorouracil with doxorubicin, cyclophos-phamide, and fluorouracil in the therapy of metastatic breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 1611-20. (C1/333)
   Google Scholar
• Bezwoda W, de Moor N, Derman D, et al. Combination chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1979; 44: 392-7. (C2/123)
   Google Scholar
• Brambilla C, De Lena M, Rossi A, et al. Response and survival in advanced breast cancer after two non-cross-resis-tant combinations. Br Med J 1976; 1: 801-4. (C2/110)
   Google Scholar
• Brincker H, Rose C, von der Maase H, et al. A randomized study of CAF ± TAM (tamoxifen) vs CMF ± TAM in metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1984; 113 (Abstr C-443). (C2/347)
   Google Scholar
• Bull J, Tormey D, Li S, et al. A randomized comparative trial of adriamycin vs methotrexate in combination drug therapy. Cancer 1978; 41: 1649-57. (C3/78)
   Google Scholar
• Cocconi G, Bisagni G, Bacchi M, et al. A comparison of continuation vs late intensification followed by discontinua-tion of chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. A prospec-tive randomized trial of the Italian Oncology Group for Clinical Research (G.O.I. R.C.). Ann Oncol 1990; 1: 36-44. (C2/102)
   Google Scholar
• Creagan E, Green S, Ahmann D, et al. A phase III clinical trial comparing the combination cyclophosphamide, adri-amycin, cisplatin with cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone in patients with advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1984; 2: 1260-5. (C2/88)
   Google Scholar
• Cummings F, Gelman R, Horton J. Comparison of CAF vs CMFP in metastatic breast cancer: analysis of prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol 1985; 3: 932-40. (C1/177)
   Google Scholar
• Leonard R, Cornbleet M, Kaye S, et al. Mitoxantrone vs doxorubicin in combination chemotherapy for advanced car-cinoma of the breast. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 1056-63. (C2/ 115)
   Google Scholar
• Muss H, White D, Richards F, et al. Adriamycin vs methotrexate in five drug combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1978; 42: 2141-8. (C2/175)
   Google Scholar
• Muss H, Richards F, Jackson D, et al. Vincristine, doxoru-bicin, and cyclophosphamide vs low-dose intravenous cy-clophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil in advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial of the Piedmont Oncology Association. Cancer 1982; 50: 2269-74. (C3/100)
   Google Scholar
• Nemoto T, Horton J, Simon R, et al. Comparison of four-combination chemotherapy programs in metastatic breast cancer: comparison of multiple drug therapy with cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone vs cytoxan and adriamycin vs cytoxan, 5-FU and adriamycin vs cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone alternating with cytoxan and adrimycin. Cancer 1982; 49: 1988-93. (C3/126)
   Google Scholar
• Parvinen L, Numminen S. Chemotherapy in advanced breast carcinoma. Comparison between doxorubicin-cyclophos-phamide and cyclophosphamide-methotrexate-5-fluorou-racil-vincristine-prednisone. Acta Radiol Oncol 1985; 24: 391–4. (C3/102)
   Google Scholar
• Smalley R, Carpenter J, Bertolucci A, et al. A comparison of cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, 5-fluorouracil (CAF) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, vincristine, prednisone (CMFVP) in patients with metastatic breast can-cer: a Southeastern Cancer Study Group project. Cancer 1977; 40: 625-32. (C2/150)
   Google Scholar
• Smalley R, Lefante J, Bartolucci A, et al. A comparison of cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, vin-cristine, and prednisone (CMFVP) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1983; 3: 209-20. (C1/362)
   Google Scholar
• Tormey D, Weinberg V, Leone L, et al. A comparison of intermittent vs. continuous and of adriamycin vs. methotrex-ate 5-drug chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. A Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. Am J Clin Oncol 1984; 7: 231–9. (C1/396)
   Google Scholar
• Hainsworth J, Jolivet J, Birch R, et al. Mitoxantrone, 5-fluorouracil, and high-dose leucovorin (NFL) vs intravenous cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast carcinoma: a randomized phase II trial. Cancer 1997; 79: 740-8. (C2/128)
   Google Scholar
• Jodrell D, Smith I, Mansi J, et al. A randomised compara-tive trial of mitozantrone/methotrexate/mitomycin C (MMM) and cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5 FU (CMF) in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1991; 63: 794-8. (C1/120)
   Google Scholar
• Stein R, Bower M, Law M, et al. Mitozantrone and methotrexate chemotherapy with and without mitomycin C in the treatment of advanced breast cancer: a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28A: 1963-5. (C2/114)
   Google Scholar
• Pavesi L, Preti P, da Prada G, et al. Epirubicin vs mitrox-antrone in combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Anticancer Res 1995; 15: 495-502. (C1/152)
   Google Scholar
• Porzsolt F, Kreuser E, Meuret G, et al. High-intensity therapy vs low-intensity therapy in advanced breast cancer patients. Cancer Treat Rev 1990; 17: 287-92. (C3/99)
   Google Scholar
• Powles T, Jones A, Judson I, et al. A randomised trial comparing combination chemotherapy using mitomycin C, mitozantrone and methotrexate (3M) with vincristine, an-thracycline and cyclophosphamide (VAC) in advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1991; 64: 406-10. (C1/217)
   Google Scholar
• A'Hern R, Smith IE, Ebbs S. Chemotherapy and survival in advanced breast cancer: the inclusion of doxorubicin in Cooper type regimens. Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 801-5. (M1/ 1088)
   Google Scholar
• Carmo-Pereira J, Costa F, Henriques E. Chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer: A randomized trial of vincristine, adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) vs cyclophos-phamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP). Cancer 1981; 48: 1517–21. (C3/51)
   Google Scholar
• Rosner D, Lane W, Nemoto T. Differential response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor level. Results of a prospective randomized study. Cancer 1989; 64: 6-15. (C2/182)
   Google Scholar
• Tormey D, Gelman R, Band P, et al. Comparison of induc-tion chemotherapies for metastatic breast cancer. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial. Cancer 1982b; 50: 1235-44. (C2/404)
   Google Scholar
• Santen R, Samojlik E. Advances in research and treatment. In: Breast Cancer. New York, USA: Plenum Press, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Mouridsen H, Alfthan C, Bastholt L, et al. Current status of epirubicin (farmorubicin) in the treatment of solid tumours. Acta Oncol 1990; 29: 257–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ejlertsen B, Pfeiffer P, Pedersen D, et al. Decreased efficacy of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil in metastatic breast cancer when reducing treatment duration from 18 to 6 months. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 527-31. (C1/359)
   Google Scholar
• Cowan J, Neidhart J, McClure S, et al. Randomized trial of doxorubicin, bisantrene, and mitoxantrone in advanced breast cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 1077-84. (C1/411)
   Google Scholar
• French Epirubicin Study Group. A prospective randomized phase III trial comparing combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and either doxorubicin or epirubicin. J Clin Oncol 1988: 6: 679-88. (C1/230)
   Google Scholar
• Gasparini G, Dal Fior S, Panizzoni G, et al. Weekly epiru-bicin vs doxorubicin as second line therapy in advanced breast cancer. A randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Oncol 1991; 14: 38-44. (C2/49)
   Google Scholar
• Henderson I, Allegra J, Woodcock T, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing mitoxantrone with doxorubicin in previously treated patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 560-71. (C1/325)
   Google Scholar
• Hortobagyi G, Yap HY, Kau S, et al. A comparative study of doxorubicin and epirubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1989; 12: 57-62. (C1/77)
   Google Scholar
• Krook J, Ingle J, Green S, et al. Randomized clinical trial of cyclophosphamide, 5-FU, and prednisone with or without tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1985; 69: 355-61. (C1/131)
   Google Scholar
• Neidhart J, Gochnour D, Roach R, et al. Mitoxantrone vs doxorubicin in advanced breast cancer: a randomized cross-over trial. Cancer Treat Rev 1983; 10 (Suppl B): 41–6. (C3/59)
   Google Scholar
• Italian Multicentre Breast Study with Epirubicin. Phase III randomized study of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophos-phamide v fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in advanced breast cancer: an Italian multicentre trial. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 976-82. (C1/497)
   Google Scholar
• Lopez M, Papaldo P, Di Lauro L, et al. 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide (FAC) vs. 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide (FEC) in metastatic breast cancer. Oncology 1989; 46: 1–5. (C2/94)
   Google Scholar
• Hryniuk W, Frei III E, Wright F. A single scale for compar-ing dose-intensity of all chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer: summation dose-intensity. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3137–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez M, Contegiacomo A, Vici P, et al. A prospective randomized trial of doxorubicin vs idarubicin in the treat-ment of advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1989; 64: 2431-6. (C2/76)
   Google Scholar
• Martoni A, Piana E, Guaraldi M, et al. Comparative phase II study of idarubicin vs doxorubicin in advanced breast cancer. Oncology 1990; 47: 427-32. (C3/63)
   Google Scholar
• Alonso M, Tabemero J, Ojeda B, et al. A phase III random-ized trial of cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, and 5-fluorouracil (CNF) vs cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) in patients with metastatic breast can-cer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995; 34: 15-24. (C2/100)
   Google Scholar
• Green J, Slater A, Campbell I, et al. Advanced breast cancer: a randomized study of doxorubicin or mitoxantrone in com-bination with cyclophosphamide and vincristine. Breast Can-cer Res Treat 1996; 39: 155-63. (C2/110)
   Google Scholar
• Hausmaninger H, Lehnert M, Steger G, et al. Vindesine-epirubicin vs vindesine-mitoxantrone in metastatic breast cancer. Onkologie 1989; 12: 225-9. (C2/230)
   Google Scholar
• Heidemann E, Steinke B, Harlapp J, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing mitoxantrone with epirubicin and with doxorubicin, each combined with cyclophosphamide in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Onkologie 1990; 13: 24-7. (C2/224)
   Google Scholar
• Periti P, Pannuti F, Della Cuna GR, et al. Combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, and ei-ther epirubicin or mitoxantrone: a comparative randomized multicenter study in metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer Invest 1991; 9: 249-55. (C3/63)
   Google Scholar
• Janssens JP, Chin Y, Deleu M, et al. Adriamycin, cyclophos-phamide and vindesine (ACV) vs mitoxantrone, cyclophos-phamide and vindesine (NCV) in advanced breast cancer. Anticancer Res 1993; 13: 2477-84. (C3/90)
   Google Scholar
• Stewart D, Evans W, Shepherd F, et al. Cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil combined with mitoxantrone vs doxoru-bicin for breast cancen superiority of doxorubicin. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1897-905. (C1/249)
   Google Scholar
• Spittle M, Hill B, Ostrowski M, et al. A randomized, prospective, comparative, multicentre trial of a single combi-nation vs alternating combinations of antitumour drugs in advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1987; 23: 1155-62. (C2/262)
   Google Scholar
• Aisner J, Cirrincione C, Perloff M, et al. Combination chemotherapy for metastatic or recurrent carcinoma of the breast-a randomized phase III trial comparing CAF vs VATH vs VATH alternating with CMFVP: Cancer and Leukemia Group B study 8281. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1443-52. (C2/497)
   Google Scholar
• Giachella O, Galvez C, Rufino C, et al. Sequential vs alternating regimens in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Tumouri 1989; 75: 137-40. (C2/250)
   Google Scholar
• Chlebowski R, Smalley R, Weiner J, et al. Combination vs sequential single agent chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: associations with metastatic sites and long-term sur-vival. Br J Cancer 1989; 59: 227-30. (C2/237)
   Google Scholar
• Joensuu H, Holli K, Heikkinen M, et al. Combination chemotherapy vs single-agent therapy as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic breast cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3720-30. (C1/303)
   Google Scholar
• Wishart G, Bissett D, Paul J, et al. Quinidine as a resistance modulator of epirubicin in advanced breast cancer: mature results of a placebo-controlled randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 1771-7. (C1/223)
   Google Scholar
• Calabresi F, Di Lauro L, Marolla P, et al. Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide vs fluorouracil, doxoru-bicin, and cyclophosphamide plus lonidamine for the treat-ment of advanced breast cancer: a multicentric randomized clinical study. Semin Oncol 1991; 18: 66-72. (C2/265)
   Google Scholar
• Dogliotti L, Berruti A, Buniva T, et al. Lonidamine signifi-cantly increases the activity of epirubicin in patients with advanced breast cancen results from a multicenter prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1165-72. (C1/207)
   Google Scholar
• Conte P, Pronzato P, Rubagotti A, et al. Conventional vs cytokinetic polychemotherapy with estrogenic recruitment in metastatic breast cancer: result of a randomized cooperative trial. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 339-47. (C2/117)
   Google Scholar
• Ingle J, Foley J, Mailliard J, et al. Randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil with or without estrogenic recruitment in women with metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1994; 73: 2337-43. (C1/165)
   Google Scholar
• Paridaens R, Heuson J, Julien J, et al. Assessment of estro-genic recruitment before chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer: a double-blind randomized study. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 1723-8. (C1/165)
   Google Scholar
• Lippman M, Cassidy J, Wesley M, et al. Increasing the response rate to cytotoxic chemotherapy by endocrine means. J Steroid Biochem 1985; 23: 1173-80. (C2/110)
   Google Scholar
• Lipton A, Santen R, Harvey H, et al. A randomized trial of aminoglutethimide + estrogen before chemotherapy in ad-vanced breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1987; 10: 65-70. (C3/39)
   Google Scholar
• Edelstyn G, Bates T, Brinkley D, et al. Comparison of 5-day, 1-day, and 2-day cyclical combination chemotherapy in ad-vanced breast cancer. Lancet 1975; 2: 209-11. (C3/165)
   Google Scholar
• Chlebowski R, Pugh R, Weiner J, et al. Treatment of advanced breast carcinoma with 5-fluorouracil: a randomized comparison of two routes of delivery. Cancer 1981; 48: 1711-4. (C3/51)
   Google Scholar
• Walters R, Frye D, Buzdar A, et al. A randomized trial of two dosage schedules of mitomycin C in advanced breast car-cinoma. Cancer 1992; 69: 476-81. (C3/67)
   Google Scholar
• Blomqvist C, Elomaa I, Rissanen P, et al. Influence of treatment schedule on toxicity and efficacy of cyclophos-phamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil in metastatic breast cancer. A randomized trial comparing weekly and every-4-week administration. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11:467–73. (C1/173)
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Malmström P, Malmberg M, Jonsson PE, et al. A dose intensity study of epirubicin weekly for disseminated breast cancer. Breast 1997; 6: 234. (C2/174)
   Google Scholar
• Bonnefoi H, Smith I, O'Brien M, et al. Phase II study of continuous infusional 5-fluorouracil with epirubicin and car-boplatin (instead of cisplatin) in patients with metastatic/lo-cally advanced breast cancer (infusional ECarboF): a very active and well-tolerated outpatient regimen. Br J Cancer 1996; 73: 391–6.
   Google Scholar
• Coates A, Gebski V, Bishop J, et al. Improving the quality of life during chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer, a comparison of intermittent and continuous treatment strate-gies. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 1490-5. (C1/308)
   Google Scholar
• Dixon A, Jackson L, Chan S, et al. Continuous chemotherapy in responsive metastatic breast cancer: a role for tumour markers? Br J Cancer 1993; 68: 181-5. (C2/67)
   Google Scholar
• Harris A, Cantwell B, Carmichael J, et al. Comparison of short-term and continuous chemotherapy (mitozantrone) for advanced breast cancer. Lancet 1990; 335: 186-90. (C3/43)
   Google Scholar
• Muss H, Case L, Richards II F, et al. Interrupted vs continuous chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 1342-8. (C1/145)
   Google Scholar
• Falkson G, Gelman R, Tormey D, et al. Mitomycin and tamoxifen vs mitolactol, doxorubicin, and tamoxifen in pa-tients with previously treated breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1985; 69: 755-60. (C2/206)
   Google Scholar
• Yap HY, Blumenschein G, Bodey G, et al. Vindesine in the treatment of refractory breast cancer: improvement in thera-peutic index with continuous 5-day infusion. Cancer Treat Rep 1981; 65: 775-9. (C3/60)
   Google Scholar
• Wood W, Budman D, Korzun A, et al. Dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1994; 330: 1253–9. (CLL 1529)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabholtz JM, Gelman K, Bontenbal M, et al. Multicenter, randomized comparative study of two doses of paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1858-67. (C1/471)
   Google Scholar
• Nabholtz JM, Senn HJ, Bezwoda WR, et al. Prospective randomised trial of docetaxel vs mitomycin C plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1413-24. (C1/392)
   Google Scholar
• Sjostrom J, Blomqvist C, Mouridsen H, et al. Docetaxel compared with sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced breast cancer after anthracycline failure: a randomised phase III study with cross-over on progression by the Scandinavian Breast Group. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35: 1194-201. (C1/283)
   Google Scholar
• Ceci G, Bisagni G, Cocconi G, et al. Cisplatin and VP16 in metastatic breast carcinoma as a third-line chemotherapy a randomized study comparing low vs high-dose of cisplatin. Tumouri 1995; 81: 241-4. (C2/95)
   Google Scholar
• Bergh J. Is there a role of intensive therapy in breast cancer? Acta Oncol 1999; 38 (Suppl 13): 37–46.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gurney H. Dose calculation of anticancer drugs: A review of the current practice and introduction of an alternative. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 2590–611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergh J. High-dose therapy with autologous bone marrow stem cell support in primary and metastatic human breast cancer-A review. Acta Oncol 1995; 34: 669–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCauley D. High-dose chemotherapy with stem-cell rescue for the treatment of breast cancer. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1996; 53: 521-34. (L2/365)
   Google Scholar
• Colleoni M, Pricer K, Catiglione-Gertsch M, et al. Dose-re-sponse effect of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in node-positive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 1693–700. (R1/1385)
   Google Scholar
• Gurney H, Ackland S, Gebski V, et al. Factors affecting epirubicin pharmacokinetics and toxicity: evidence against using body-surface area for dose calculation. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2299–304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saarto T, Blomqvist C, Rissanen P, et al. Haematological toxicity: a marker of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy in stage II and III breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1997; 75: 301-5. (R1/211)
   Google Scholar
• Sandstrom M, Freijs A, Larsson R, et al. Lack of relationship between systemic exposure for the component drugs of the fluorouracil, epirubicin, and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide regimen in breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1581–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmann D, O'Fallon J, Scanlon P, et al. A preliminary assessment of factors associated with recurrent disease in a surgical adjuvant clinical trial for patients with breast cancer with special emphasis on the aggressiveness of therapy. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5: 371–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samonigg H, Stoger H, Kasparek A, et al. Prednimustine combined with mitoxantrone and 5-fluorouracil for first and second-line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1991; 27: 477–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hryniuk W, Bush H. The importance of dose intensity in chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1984; 2: 1281–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hryniuk W, Levine M. Analysis of dose intensity for adju-vant chemotherapy trials in stage II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 1162-670. (L2/6106)
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham D, et al. Increased inten-sification and total dose of cyclophosphamide in a doxoru-bicin-cyclophosphamide regimen for the treatment of primary breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Ad-juvant Breast and Bowel Project B-22. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1858-69. (C1/2305)
   Google Scholar
• The French Adjuvant Study Group. Benefit of a high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant chemotherapy for node-posi-tive breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors-5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 602–11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peters W, Ross M, Vredenburgh J, et al. High-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow support as con-solidation after standard-dose adjuvant therapy for high-risk primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 1132–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodenhuis S, Richel D, van der Wall E, et al. Randomised trial of high-dose chemotherapy and haemopoietic progeni-tor-cell support in operable breast cancer with extensive axillary lymph-node involvement. Lancet 1998; 352: 515-21. (C2/81)
   Google Scholar
• Hortobagyi G, Buzdar A, Champlin R, et al. Lack of efficacy of adjuvant high-dose(HD) tandem combination chemotherapy (CT) for high-risk primary breast cancer (HRPBC)-A randomized trial. Thirty-Fourth Annual Meet-ing, Los Angeles, CA. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17. (C2/78)
   Google Scholar
• Peters W, Rosner G, Vredenburgh, et al. A propsective, randomized comparison of two doses of combination alky-lating agents (AA) as consolidation after CAF in high-risk primary breast cancer involving ten or more axillary nodes (ln): Preliminary results of CALGB 9082/SWOG 9114/NCIC MA-13. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; Abstr 2: 15–8. (C3/874)
   Google Scholar
• Bergh J, Wiklund T, Erikstein B, et al. Tailored fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide compared with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for high- risk breast cancer: a randomised trial. Scandina-vian Breast Group 9401 study. Lancet 2000; 356: 1384–91. (C1/525)
   Google Scholar
• Bastholt L, Dalmark M, Gjedde S, et al. Dose-response relationship of epirubicin in the treatment of post-menopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer: A ran-domized study of epirubicin at four different dose levels performed by the Danish breast cancer cooperative group. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1146-55. (C1/287)
   Google Scholar
• Brufman G, Colajori E, Ghilezan N, et al. Doubling epiru-bicin dose intensity (100 mg/m2 vs 50 mg/m2) in the FEC regimen significantly increases response rates. An interna-tional randomised phase III study in metastatic breast can-cer. The Epirubicin High-dose (HEPI 010) Study Group. Ann Oncol 1997; 8: 155–62. (C1/456)
   Google Scholar
• Carmo-Pereira J, Costa F, Henriques E, et al. A comparison of two doses of adriamycin in the primary chemotherapy of disseminated breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1987; 56: 471–3. (C2/48)
   Google Scholar
• Ebbs S, Saunders J, Graham G, et al. Advanced breast cancer. A randomised trial of epidoxorubicin at two differ-ent dosages and two administration systems. Acta Oncol 1989; 28: 887-92. (C3/62)
   Google Scholar
• Focan C, Andrien J, Closon M, et al. Dose-response rela-tionship of epirubicin-based first-line chemotherapy for ad-vanced breast cancer: A prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 1253-63. (C1/164)
   Google Scholar
• Forastiere A, Hakes T, Wittes J, et al. Cisplatin in the treatment of metastatic breast carcinoma: a prospective ran-domized trial of two dosage schedules. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5: 243-7. (C3/37)
   Google Scholar
• Habeshaw T, Jones P, Stewart S, et al. Epirubicin at two dose levels with prednisolone as treatment for advanced breast cancer: The results of a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 295-304. (C1/211)
   Google Scholar
• Hortobagyi G, Bodey G, Buzdar A, et al. Evaluation of high-dose vs standard FAC chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer in protected environment units: a prospective randomized study. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 354-64. (C3/59)
   Google Scholar
• Riccardi A, Giordano M, Brugnatelli S, et al. Different doses of epirubicin associated with fixed doses of cyclophos-phamide and 5-fluorouracil: a randomised study in advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1995; 31A: 1549-51. (C3/67)
   Google Scholar
• Richards M, Hopwood P, Ramirez A, et al. Doxorubicin in advanced breast cancer: influence of schedule on response, survival and quality of life. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28A: 1023-8. (C2/59)
   Google Scholar
• Rosner D, Nemoto T, Lane W. A randomized study of intensive vs moderate chemotherapy programs in metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1987; 59: 874-83. (C3/141)
   Google Scholar
• Tannock I, Boyd N, DeBoer G, et al. A randomized trial of two dose levels of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 1377-87. (C1/133)
   Google Scholar
• Bezwoda W, Seymour L, Dansey R. High-dose chemother-apy with hematopoietic rescue as primary treatment for metastatic breast cancer: A randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2483-9. (C3/90)
   Google Scholar
• Bezwoda, WR. Primary high-dose chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancen update and analysis of prognostic factors. In: Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting (M. Perry, ed.). Los Angeles, CA. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17: Abstr 445 115a. Please see also Weiss et al. Lancet 2000; 355: 999–1003.
   Google Scholar
• Stadtmauer EA, O'Neill A, Goldstein LJ, et al. Conven-tional-dose chemotherapy compared with high-dose chemotherapy plus autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for metastatic breast cancer. Philadelphia Bone Marrow Transplant Group. N Eng J Med 2000; 342: 1069–76.
   Google Scholar
• Antman K, Rowlings P, Vaughan W, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell sup-port for breast cancer in North America. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1870-9. (R1/5886)
   Google Scholar
• Ljungman P, Björkstrand B, Fornander T, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support in patients with responding stage IV breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transpl 1998; 22: 445–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clark G, Sledge G, Osborne C, et al. Survival from first recurrence: relative importance of prognostic fators in 1,015 breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1987; 5: 55–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falkson G, Gelman R, Leone L, et al. Survival of pre-menopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. Long-term follow-up of Eastern Cooperative Group and Cancer and Leukemia Group B studies. Cancer 1990; 66: 1621–9.
   Google Scholar
• Falkson G, Tormey D, Carey P, et al. Long-term survival of patients treated with combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 973–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Henderson I. Chemotherapy for advanced disease. In: Harris J, Hellman S, Henderson I, et al., eds. Breast Diseases. Philadelphia: PA Lippincott, 1987: 428–79.
   Google Scholar
• Mick R, Begg C, Antman K, et al. Diverse prognosis in metastatic breast cancer: who should be offered alternative initial therapies? Breast Cancer Res Treat 1989; 13: 33–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahman Z, Frye D, Buzdar A, et al. Impact of selection process on response rate and long-term survival of potential high-dose chemotherapy candidates treated with standard-dose doxorubicin-containing chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 3171-7. (L1/1581)
   Google Scholar
• Zujewski J, Nelson A, Abrams J. Much ado about not... enough data: high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 200–9.
   Google Scholar
• Chevallier B, Chollet P, Merrouche Y, et al. Lenograstim prevents morbidity from intensive induction chemotherapy in the treatment of inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1564-71. (C2/120)
   Google Scholar
• de Wit R, Verweij J, Bontenbal M, et al. Adverse effect on bone marrow protection of prechemotherapy granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88: 1393-8. (C3/36)
   Google Scholar
• Sanchiz F, Milla A. A randomised study comparing granulo-cyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) with G-CSF plus thymostimulin in the treatment of haematological toxicity in patients with advanced breast cancer after high-dose mitox-antrone therapy. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A: 52-6. (C3/54)
   Google Scholar
• Muhonen T, Jantunen I, Pertovaara H, et al. Prophylactic filgrastim (G-CSF) during mutimycin-C, mitoxantrone, and methotrexate (MMM) treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 1996; 19: 232-4. (C3/32)
   Google Scholar
• Ardizzoni A, Venturini M, Sertoli M, et al. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) allows ac-celeration and dose intensity increase of CEF chemotherapy: a randomised study in patients with advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1994; 69: 385-91. (C2/62)
   Google Scholar
• Lalisang R, Wils J, Nortier H, et al. Comparative study of dose escalation vs interval reduction to obtain dose-intensifi-cation of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1367–76.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bronchud M, Howell A, Crowther D, et al. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to increase the intensity of treatment with doxorubicin in patients with advanced breast and ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 1989; 60: 121–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoekman K, Wagstaff J, van Groeningen C, et al. Effects of recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimu-lating factor on myelosuppression induced by multiple cycles of high-dose chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991; 83: 1546–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Shaughnessy J, Denicoff A, Venzon D, et al. A dose intensity study of FLAC (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, doxoru-bicin, cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy and Escherichia coli-derived granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in advanced breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 709–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piccart M, Bruning P, Wildiers J, et al. An EORTC pilot study of filgrastim (recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor) as support to a high-dose-intensive epi-adriamycin-cyclophosphamide regimen in chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1995; 6: 673–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scinto A, Ferraresi V, Campioni N, et al. Accelerated chemotherapy with high-dose epirubicin and cyclophos-phamide plus r-met-HUG-CSF in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 1995; 6: 665–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Klefstrom P. Combination of levamisole immunotherapy and polychemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1980; 64: 65-72. (C2/101)
   Google Scholar
• Stephens E, Wood H, Mason B. Levamisole: As adjuvant to cyclic chemotherapy in breast cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res 1979; 68: 139-45. (C3/60)
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter Jr J, Smalley R, Raney M, et al. Ineffectiveness of levamixole in prolonging remission or survival of women treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-fluorou-racil for good-risk metastatic breast carcinoma: A Southeast-ern cancer study group trial. Cancer Treat Rep 1986; 70: 1073-9. (C2/105)
   Google Scholar
• Hortobagyi G, Buzdar A, Frye D, et al. Combined antiestro-gen and cytotoxic therapy with pseudomonas vaccine im-munohterapy for metastatic breast cancer. A prospective, randomized trial. Cancer 1987; 60: 2596-604. (C2/146)
   Google Scholar
• Cobleigh MA, Vogel CL, Tripathy D, et al. Multinational study of the efficacy and safety of humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody in women who have HER2-overex-pressing metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after chemotherapy for metastatic disease. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 2639–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slamon DL, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 783–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurny C, Bernhard J, Coates A, et al. Impact of adjuvant therapy on quality of life in women with node-positive operable breast cancer. Lancet 1996; 347: 1279–84. (CLL 2 687)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldhirsch A, Gelber R, Simes R, et al. Costs and benefits of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer: a quality-adjusted survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 36-44. (C1/463)
   Google Scholar
• Palmer B, Walsh G, McKinna J, et al. Adjuvant chemother-apy for breast cancer: side-effects and quality of life. Br Med J 1980; 281: 1594-7. (C3/47)
   Google Scholar
• Lindley C, Vasa S, Sawyer WT, et al. Quality of life and preferences for treatment following systemic adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 1380–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorval M, Maunsell E, Deschenes L, et al. Long-term quality of life after breast cancen comparison of 8-year survivors with population controls. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 487–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broeckel JA, Jacobsen PB, Horton J, et al. Characteristics and correlates of fatigue after adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 1689–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganz PA, Rowland JH, Desmond K, et al. Life after breast cancer: understanding women's health-related quality of life and sexual functioning J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 501–14.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips K, Brezden C, Abdolell M, et al. Cognitive function in breast cancer patients receiving standard-dose adjuvant chemotherapy. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18 Abstr 74.
   Google Scholar
• Ravdin PM, Siminoff IA, Harvey JA. Survey of breast cancer patients concerning their knowledge and expectations of adjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 515–21.
   Google Scholar
• Ramirez A, Towlson K, Leaning M, et al. Do patients with advanced breast cancer benefit from chemotherapy? Br J Cancer 1998; 78: 1488–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar