scholarly journals Taxanes Alone or in Combination With Anthracyclines As First-Line Therapy of Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 1980-1986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine J. Piccart-Gebhart ◽  
Tomasz Burzykowski ◽  
Marc Buyse ◽  
George Sledge ◽  
James Carmichael ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Hazard Ratios

Purpose Taxanes (paclitaxel or docetaxel) have been sequenced or combined with anthracyclines (doxorubicin or epirubicin) for the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer. This meta-analysis uses data from all relevant trials to detect any advantages of taxanes in terms of tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), and survival. Patients and Methods Individual patient data were collected on eight randomized combination trials comparing anthracyclines + taxanes (+ cyclophosphamide in one trial) with anthracyclines + cyclophosphamide (+ fluorouracil in four trials), and on three single-agent trials comparing taxanes with anthracyclines. Combination trials included 3,034 patients; single-agent trials included 919 patients. Results Median follow-up of living patients was 43 months, median survival was 19.3 months, and median PFS was 7.1 months. In single-agent trials, response rates were similar in the taxanes (38%) and in the anthracyclines (33%) arms (P = .08). The hazard ratios for taxanes compared with anthracyclines were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.36; P = .011) for PFS and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.16; P = .90) for survival. In combination trials, response rates were 57% (10% complete) in taxane-based combinations and 46% (6% complete) in control arms (P < .001). The hazard ratios for taxane-based combinations compared with control arms were 0.92 (95% CI, 0.85 to 0.99; P = .031) for PFS and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.03; P = .24) for survival. Conclusion Taxanes were significantly worse than single-agent anthracyclines in terms of PFS, but not in terms of response rates or survival. Taxane-based combinations were significantly better than anthracycline-based combinations in terms of response rates and PFS, but not in terms of survival.

scholarly journals Bevacizumab and Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of First-Line Phase III Studies and a Critical Reappraisal of Available Evidence

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
José R. Rossari ◽  
Otto Metzger-Filho ◽  
Marianne Paesmans ◽  
Kamal S. Saini ◽  
Alessandra Gennari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Statistical Estimates ◽  
Treatment Indications ◽  
Phase Iii Studies

Background. Randomized studies have shown different magnitude of bevacizumab benefit in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Regulatory agencies have modified bevacizumab treatment indications across different regions. In this study, we perform a meta-analysis of phase III studies aiming to interrogate the magnitude of bevacizumab benefit for the treatment of first-line HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC).Methods. Data from studies E2100, AVADO and RIBBON-1 were used to calculate the benefit of bevacizumab in terms of tumor overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Combined statistical estimates of hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios were calculated using fixed-effects or random-effects models.Results. A total of 2,695 patients were evaluated. Combining bevacizumab with different chemotherapy backbones resulted in a 30% risk reduction of PFS events (HR = 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57–0.86) and increased ORR (odds ratio 1.81; 95% CI, 1.53–2.14). No OS benefit could be demonstrated (HR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85–1.06). Bevacizumab significantly increased the incidence of adverse events such as proteinuria, hypertension and cardiovascular events.Conclusions. Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of MBC significantly improved ORR and PFS, but also increased grade 3-4 toxicities. No significant OS advantage was observed.

Cisplatin as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer.

1988 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 1811-1814 ◽  
Author(s):  
G W Sledge ◽  
P J Loehrer ◽  
B J Roth ◽  
L H Einhorn
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
Third Line

Cisplatin has had only minimal activity when used as second- and third-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). There have been no phase II studies in the United States evaluating cisplatin in patients with MBC with no prior chemotherapy. We therefore treated 20 consecutive patients with cisplatin 30 mg/m2/d for four days every 3 weeks for a maximum of six courses. We obtained partial responses in nine of 19 evaluable patients (47%), with responses in liver, lung, and soft tissue indicator lesions. Our data suggest that cisplatin has substantial single-agent activity as front-line therapy in MBC, and should be considered for inclusion in first-line combination chemotherapy regimens.

scholarly journals Phase II Trial of a Novel Paclitaxel Schedule As Single-Agent, First-Line Therapy for HER-2/neu–Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Community-Based Study

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 268-273
Author(s):  
David Loesch ◽  
Nicholas Robert ◽  
Stephen Jones ◽  
Maha Elkordy ◽  
Des Ilegbodu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Her 2

Purpose To determine the response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity in patients with HER-2/neu–negative metastatic breast cancer treated with first-line paclitaxel in a de-escalating dosing schedule. Patients and Methods Between August 1999 and December 2000, 73 patients were enrolled. Paclitaxel was administered on day 1 (175 mg/m2) and on days 8 and 15 (80 mg/m2 each) in each 4-week cycle (1 week of rest). Doses were de-escalated with the aim of reducing toxicity. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 was found in 55%, 41%, and 4% of patients, respectively. Median age was 59 years (range, 38 to 84 years), and 86% of patients had received prior surgery; 60%, adjuvant chemotherapy; and 59%, radiation therapy. Results Based on an intention-to-treat analysis (N = 73), there were five patients with a complete response (6.8%), 16 with a partial response (21.9%), 17 with stable disease (23.3%), and 23 with progressive disease (31.5%) for an RR of 28.7%. Twelve patients (16.4%) were not assessable for response due to toxicity (seven patients, mainly neuropathy), withdrawal of consent (two patients), early death (two patients), or noncompliance (one patient). Median PFS was 6.5 months (range, < 1 to 36.1 months), median survival was 22.8 months (range, < 1 to 36.1 months), and median duration of response was 8.8 months (range, 3.0 to 31.8 months). Patients (n = 72) were evaluated for toxicity. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related toxicities occurring in more than 5% of patients included neutropenia (22.2%), neuropathy (18.1%), fatigue (6.9%), and leukopenia (5.6%). Conclusion In a unique de-escalating schedule, this study of single-agent paclitaxel produced a response rate similar to other single-agent paclitaxel schedules, in first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer, published in the literature. However, this schedule is not recommended for the therapy of metastatic breast cancer because of the higher rate of toxicity.

Paclitaxel Versus Doxorubicin as First-Line Single-Agent Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study With Cross-Over

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 724-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Paridaens ◽  
L. Biganzoli ◽  
P. Bruning ◽  
J.G. M. Klijn ◽  
T. Gamucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Cross Resistance ◽  
First Line ◽  
European Organization ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival [PFS]) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m2, 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m2, intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P = .003) for doxorubicin (response rate [RR], 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P < .001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P = .38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

Non-Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin in Combination with Cyclophosphamide or Docetaxel as First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 422-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Livi ◽  
Icro Meattini ◽  
Carla De Luca Cardillo ◽  
Monica Mangoni ◽  
Daniela Greto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Aims and background Anthracyclines such as doxorubicin play a central role in the management of advanced breast cancer. Unfortunately, the clinical benefits of anthracyclines are limited by cardiotoxicity that can lead to the development of potentially fatal congestive heart failure. In order to limit anthracycline-related cardiotoxicity, liposomal formulations of doxorubicin have been developed. This retrospective analysis evaluated the experience obtained with non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as first-line therapy in 34 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods Patients received non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in combination with either cyclophosphamide (n = 14) or docetaxel (n = 20) for up to eight cycles, and efficacy and safety were assessed according to standard criteria. Results The overall response rate was 71%. The median progression-free survival was 8 months in patients receiving non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide and 13.8 months in those receiving non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus docetaxel (P = 0.2). The most commonly observed toxicities were grade 1–2 leucopenia, alopecia, nausea and vomiting; no grade 3–4 toxicities were observed. Overall, three patients (9%) experienced grade 1 cardiac toxicity. Conclusions Our results support the use of non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin as an alternative to conventional doxorubicin formulations in combination regimens for the first-line therapy of metastatic breast cancer.

scholarly journals Randomized Phase III Trial of Paclitaxel Once Per Week Compared With Nanoparticle Albumin-Bound Nab-Paclitaxel Once Per Week or Ixabepilone With Bevacizumab As First-Line Chemotherapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer: CALGB 40502/NCCTG N063H (Alliance)

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (21) ◽  
pp. 2361-2369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hope S. Rugo ◽  
William T. Barry ◽  
Alvaro Moreno-Aspitia ◽  
Alan P. Lyss ◽  
Constance Cirrincione ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Nonhematologic Toxicity

Purpose We compared nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone once per week to paclitaxel with bevacizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced breast cancer (BC) to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) for nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone versus paclitaxel. Patients and Methods Eligible patients were age ≥ 18 years with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC. Patients were randomly assigned to bevacizumab with paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 (arm A), nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 (arm B), or ixabepilone 16 mg/m2 (arm C), once per week for 3 of 4 weeks. Planned enrollment was 900 patients, which would give 88% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.73. Results In all, 799 patients were enrolled, and 783 received treatment (97% received bevacizumab). Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and arm A (n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis. Median PFS for paclitaxel was 11 months, ixabepilone was inferior to paclitaxel (PFS, 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.93; P < .001), and nab-paclitaxel was not superior to paclitaxel (PFS, 9.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45; P = .054). Results were concordant with overall survival; time to treatment failure was significantly shorter in both experimental arms v paclitaxel. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy, was increased with nab-paclitaxel, with more frequent and earlier dose reductions. Conclusion In patients with chemotherapy-naive advanced BC, ixabepilone once per week was inferior to paclitaxel, and nab-paclitaxel was not superior with a trend toward inferiority. Toxicity was increased in the experimental arms, particularly for nab-paclitaxel. Paclitaxel once per week remains the preferred palliative chemotherapy in this setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document