scholarly journals Does the addition of chemotherapy to adjuvant endocrine treatment add any benefit in ER-positive early breast cancer: can we rely on large randomized control trials in the era of personalized medicine?

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 1937-1938
Author(s):  
S. Glück
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Personalized Medicine ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Endocrine Treatment ◽  
Randomized Control Trials ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Randomized Control

Gene Expression Assay in the Management of Early Breast Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (17) ◽  
pp. 2826-2839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Caputo ◽  
Daniela Cianniello ◽  
Antonio Giordano ◽  
Michela Piezzo ◽  
Maria Riemma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Gene Expression ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Endocrine Treatment ◽  
Expression Ratio ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Low Sensitivity

The addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to hormonal therapy is often considered questionable in patients with estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer. Low risk of disease relapse after endocrine treatment alone and/or a low sensitivity to chemotherapy are reasons behind not all patients benefit from chemotherapy. Most of the patients could be exposed to unnecessary treatment- related adverse events and health care costs when treatment decision-making is based only on classical clinical histological features. Gene expression profile has been developed to refine physician’s decision-making process and to tailor personalized treatment to patients. In particular, these tests are designed to spare patients the side effects of unnecessary treatment, and ensure that adjuvant chemotherapy is correctly recommended to patients with early breast cancer. In this review, we will discuss the main diagnostic tests and their potential clinical applications (Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, PAM50/Prosigna, EndoPredict, MapQuant Dx, IHC4, and Theros-Breast Cancer Gene Expression Ratio Assay).

scholarly journals Clinical CYP2D6 Genotyping to Personalize Adjuvant Tamoxifen Treatment in ER-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: Current Status of a Controversy

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 771
Author(s):  
Tessa A. M. Mulder ◽  
Mirjam de With ◽  
Marzia del Re ◽  
Romano Danesi ◽  
Ron H. J. Mathijssen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Plasma Concentrations ◽  
Tamoxifen Treatment ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Endocrine Treatment ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

Tamoxifen is a major option for adjuvant endocrine treatment in estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer patients. The conversion of the prodrug tamoxifen into the most active metabolite endoxifen is mainly catalyzed by the enzyme cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Genetic variation in the CYP2D6 gene leads to altered enzyme activity, which influences endoxifen formation and thereby potentially therapy outcome. The association between genetically compromised CYP2D6 activity and low endoxifen plasma concentrations is generally accepted, and it was shown that tamoxifen dose increments in compromised patients resulted in higher endoxifen concentrations. However, the correlation between CYP2D6 genotype and clinical outcome is still under debate. This has led to genotype-based tamoxifen dosing recommendations by the Clinical Pharmacogenetic Implementation Consortium (CPIC) in 2018, whereas in 2019, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) discouraged the use of CYP2D6 genotyping in clinical practice for tamoxifen therapy. This paper describes the latest developments on CYP2D6 genotyping in relation to endoxifen plasma concentrations and tamoxifen-related clinical outcome. Therefore, we focused on Pharmacogenetic publications from 2018 (CPIC publication) to 2021 in order to shed a light on the current status of this debate.

Goserelin Versus Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, and Fluorouracil as Adjuvant Therapy in Premenopausal Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Study

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (24) ◽  
pp. 4628-4635 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Jonat ◽  
M. Kaufmann ◽  
W. Sauerbrei ◽  
R. Blamey ◽  
J. Cuzick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Association Study ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Node Positive ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
Premenopausal Patients ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: Current adjuvant therapies have improved survival for premenopausal patients with breast cancer but may have short-term toxic effects and long-term effects associated with premature menopause. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days for 2 years; n = 817) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy (six 28-day cycles; n = 823) for adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer. RESULTS: Analysis was performed when 684 events had been achieved, and the median follow-up was 6 years. A significant interaction between treatment and estrogen receptor (ER) status was found (P = .0016). In ER-positive patients (approximately 74%), goserelin was equivalent to CMF for disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.20). In ER-negative patients, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS (HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.44). Amenorrhea occurred in more than 95% of goserelin patients by 6 months versus 58.6% of CMF patients. Menses returned in most goserelin patients after therapy stopped, whereas amenorrhea was generally permanent in CMF patients (22.6% v 76.9% amenorrheic at 3 years). Chemotherapy-related side effects such as nausea/vomiting, alopecia, and infection were higher with CMF than with goserelin during CMF treatment. Side effects related to estrogen suppression were initially higher with goserelin, but when goserelin treatment stopped, reduced to a level below that observed in the CMF group. CONCLUSION: Goserelin offers an effective, well-tolerated alternative to CMF in premenopausal patients with ER-positive and node-positive early breast cancer.

Defining the role of aromatase inhibitors in the adjuvant endocrine treatment of early breast cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1575-1585 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aman Buzdar ◽  
Rowan Chlebowski ◽  
Jack Cuzick ◽  
Sean Duffy ◽  
John Forbes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Aromatase Inhibitors ◽  
Endocrine Treatment

scholarly journals Economic evaluation of hormonal therapies for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive early breast cancer in Canada

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 84 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Djalalov ◽  
J. Beca ◽  
E. Amir ◽  
M. Krahn ◽  
M.E. Trudeau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Parameter Uncertainties ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Er Positive ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundAromatase inhibitor (ai) therapy has been subjected to numerous cost-effectiveness analyses. However, with most ais having reached the end of patent protection and with maturation of the clinical trials data, a re-analysis of ai cost-effectiveness and a consideration of ai use as part of sequential therapy is desirable. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the 5-year upfront and sequential tamoxifen (tam) and ai hormonal strategies currently used for treating patients with estrogen receptor (er)–positive early breast cancer.Methods The cost-effectiveness analysis used a Markov model that took a Canadian health system perspective with a lifetime time horizon. The base case involved 65-year-old women with er-positive early breast cancer. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to incorporate parameter uncertainties. An expected-value-of-perfect-information test was performed to identify future research directions. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) and costs.Results The sequential tam–ai strategy was less costly than the other strategies, but less effective than upfront ai and more effective than upfront tam. Upfront ai was more effective and less costly than upfront tam because of less breast cancer recurrence and differences in adverse events. In an exploratory analysis that included a sequential ai–tam strategy, ai–tam dominated based on small numerical differences unlikely to be clinically significant; that strategy was thus not used in the base-case analysis.ConclusionsIn postmenopausal women with er-positive early breast cancer, strategies using ais appear to provide more benefit than strategies using tam alone. Among the ai-containing strategies, sequential strategies using tam and an ai appear to provide benefits similar to those provided by upfront ai, but at a lower cost.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document