Dose intense, dose dense and tailored dose adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer: an evolution of concepts

References

• Halsted WS. I. The results of radical operations for the cure of carcinoma of the breast. Ann Surg. 1907;46:1–19.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative G, Peto R, Davies C, et al. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet. 2012;379:432–444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vadhan-Raj S, Goldberg JD, Perales MA, et al. Clinical applications of palifermin: amelioration of oral mucositis and other potential indications. J Cell Mol Med. 2013;17:1371–1384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hryniuk W, Levine MN. Analysis of dose intensity for adjuvant chemotherapy trials in stage II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:1162–1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Hoff DD, Clark GM, Weiss GR, et al. Use of in vitro dose response effects to select antineoplastics for high-dose or regional administration regimens. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:1827–1834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford J, Ozer H, Stoller R, et al. Reduction by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor of fever and neutropenia induced by chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:164–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budman DR, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al. Dose and dose intensity as determinants of outcome in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. The Cancer and Leukemia Group B. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:1205–1211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French Adjuvant Study G. Benefit of a high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors: 5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. JCO. 2001;19:602–611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonneterre J, Roche H, Kerbrat P, et al. Epirubicin increases long-term survival in adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with poor-prognosis, node-positive, early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. JCO. 2005;23:2686–2693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson IC, Berry DA, Demetri GD, et al. Improved outcomes from adding sequential Paclitaxel but not from escalating Doxorubicin dose in an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:976–983.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham DL, et al. Increased intensification and total dose of cyclophosphamide in a doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen for the treatment of primary breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-22. JCO. 1997;15:1858–1869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Anderson S, DeCillis A, et al. Further evaluation of intensified and increased total dose of cyclophosphamide for the treatment of primary breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-25. JCO. 1999;17:3374–3388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman LN, Cirrincione CT, Berry DA, et al. Six cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide or Paclitaxel are not superior to four cycles as adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer in women with zero to three positive axillary nodes: Cancer and Leukemia Group B 40101. JCO. 2012;30:4071–4076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry DA, Ueno NT, Johnson MM, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell support as adjuvant therapy in breast cancer: overview of 15 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3214–3223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skipper HE, Schabel FM, Jr, Wilcox WS. Experimental evaluation of potential anticancer agents. Xiii. On the criteria and kinetics associated with “curability” of experimental leukemia. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1964;35:1–111.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Norton L. Cancer log-kill revisited. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2014;3–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simon R, Norton L. The Norton–Simon hypothesis: designing more effective and less toxic chemotherapeutic regimens. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006;3:406–407.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. JCO. 2003;21:1431–1439.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Del Mastro L, De Placido S, Bruzzi P, et al. Fluorouracil and dose-dense chemotherapy in adjuvant treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer: an open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2015;385:1863–1872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venturini M, Del Mastro L, Aitini E, et al. Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer patients: results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1724–1733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron D, Barrett-Lee P, Canney P, et al. The UK TACT2 Trial: comparison of standard vs accelerated epirubicin in patients requiring chemotherapy for early breast cancer (EBC) (CRUK/05/019). San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2012; San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Albain KS, Nag SM, Calderillo-Ruiz G, et al. Gemcitabine plus Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline treatment. JCO. 2008;26:3950–3957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain SM, Tang G, Geyer CE Jr, et al. Definitive results of a phase III adjuvant trial comparing three chemotherapy regimens in women with operable, node-positive breast cancer: the NSABP B-38 trial. JCO. 2013;31:3197–3204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eiermann W, Pienkowski T, Crown J, et al. Phase III study of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide with concomitant versus sequential docetaxel as adjuvant treatment in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-normal, node-positive breast cancer: BCIRG-005 trial. JCO. 2011;29:3877–3884.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gogas H, Dafni U, Karina M, et al. Postoperative dose-dense sequential versus concomitant administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel in patients with node-positive breast cancer: 5-year results of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group HE 10/00 phase III Trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:609–619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones S, Holmes FA, O'shaughnessy J, et al. Docetaxel with cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow-up of US Oncology Research Trial 9735. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1177–1183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blum JL, Flynn P, Yothers G, et al. Interim joint analysis of the ABC (anthracyclines in early breast cancer) phase III trials (USOR 06-090, NSABP B-46I/USOR 07132, NSABP B-49 [NRG Oncology]) comparing docetaxel + cyclophosphamide (TC) v anthracycline/taxane-based chemotherapy regimens (TaxAC) in women with high-risk, HER2-negative breast cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; 2016; Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Mavroudis D, Matikas A, Malamos N, et al. Dose-dense FEC followed by Docetaxel versus Docetaxel plus Cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy in women with HER2-negative, axillary lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a multicenter randomized study by the Hellenic Oncology Research Group (HORG). Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1873–1878.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrelli F, Cabiddu M, Coinu A, et al. Adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;151:251–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1663–1671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Zhao F, Martino S, et al. Long-term follow-up of the E1199 phase III trial evaluating the role of taxane and schedule in operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2353–2360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therasse P, Mauriac L, Welnicka-Jaskiewicz M, et al. Final results of a randomized phase III trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with a dose-intensified epirubicin and cyclophosphamide + filgrastim as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced breast cancer: an EORTC-NCIC-SAKK multicenter study. JCO. 2003;21:843–850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnell M, Levine MN, Chapman JA, et al. Cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and Fluorouracil versus dose-dense epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by Paclitaxel versus Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by Paclitaxel in node-positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:77–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moebus V, Jackisch C, Lueck HJ, et al. Intense dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide compared with conventionally scheduled chemotherapy in high-risk primary breast cancer: mature results of an AGO phase III study. JCO. 2010;28:2874–2880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moebus V, von Minckwitz G, Jackisch C, et al. German Adjuvant Intergroup Node-positive Study (GAIN): a phase III Trial Comparing Two Dose-Dense Regimens (iddEPC vs. ddEC-PwX) in high-risk early breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2017 [cited Apr 28]. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdx203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurney HP, Ackland S, Gebski V, et al. Factors affecting epirubicin pharmacokinetics and toxicity: evidence against using body-surface area for dose calculation. JCO. 1998;16:2299–2304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandstrom M, Freijs A, Larsson R, et al. Lack of relationship between systemic exposure for the component drug of the fluorouracil, epirubicin, and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide regimen in breast cancer patients. JCO. 1996;14:1581–1588.
   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;75:301–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colleoni M, Price K, Castiglione-Gertsch M, et al. Dose-response effect of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) in node-positive breast cancer. International Breast. Cancer Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1998;34:1693–1700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poikonen P, Saarto T, Lundin J, et al. Leucocyte nadir as a marker for chemotherapy efficacy in node-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant CMF. Br J Cancer. 1999;80:1763–1766.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron DA, Massie C, Kerr G, et al. Moderate neutropenia with adjuvant CMF confers improved survival in early breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2003;89:1837–1842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paridaens R, Wildiers J, Dumez H, et al. Impact of dose-intensity of adjuvant CMF on disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in breast cancer (BC): a retrospective analysis. 27th ESMO Congress; 2002 Oct 18–22; Nice: Annals of Oncology, Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: the FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. JCO. 2006;24:5664–5671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foukakis T, Von Minckwitz G, Bengtsson N, et al. Effect of tailored dose-dense chemotherapy vs standard 3-weekly adjuvant chemotherapy on recurrence-free survival among women with high-risk early breast cancer. JAMA. 2016;316:1888–1896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budd GT, Barlow WE, Moore HC, et al. SWOG S0221: a phase III trial comparing chemotherapy schedules in high-risk early-stage breast cancer. JCO. 2015;33:58–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain SM, Jeong JH, Geyer CE, Jr, et al. Longer therapy, iatrogenic amenorrhea, and survival in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2053–2065.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peto R. Current misconception 3: that subgroup-specific trial mortality results often provide a good basis for individualising patient care. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1057–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26 Suppl 5:v8–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris LN, Ismaila N, McShane LM, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. JCO. 2016;34:1134–1150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2005–2014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gluz O, Nitz UA, Christgen M, et al. West German Study Group Phase III PlanB Trial: first prospective outcome data for the 21-gene recurrence score assay and concordance of prognostic markers by central and local pathology assessment. JCO. 2016;34:2341–2349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparano JA, Paik S. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:721–728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–1167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gnant M, Filipits M, Greil R, et al. Predicting distant recurrence in receptor-positive breast cancer patients with limited clinicopathological risk: using the PAM50 Risk of Recurrence score in 1478 postmenopausal patients of the ABCSG-8 trial treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:339–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso F, Van't Veer LJ, Bogaerts J, et al. 70-Gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:717–729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubsky P, Brase JC, Jakesz R, et al. The EndoPredict score provides prognostic information on late distant metastases in ER+/HER2– breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2013;109:2959–2964.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, et al. The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:2329–2334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer. 1989;63:181–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwentner L, Wockel A, Konig J, et al. Assessing the impact of CMF-like/anthracycline-based/anthracycline-taxane-based/dose-dense chemotherapy in dependency of positive axillary lymph nodes/hormone receptor-status/grading/T-stage on survival – a retrospective multi-centre cohort study of 3677 patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:2905–2915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mobus V. Adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy in breast cancer: standard of care in high-risk patients. Breast Care (Basel). 2016;11:8–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A, et al. Tailoring therapies – improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1533–1546.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar