scholarly journals Could Primary Tumor Resection Improve Survival in Metastatic Breast Cancer?

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (07) ◽  
pp. 422-428
Author(s):  
Rafaela Aparecida Dias de Oliveira ◽  
Lyvia Aparecida Dias de Oliveira ◽  
Marília Davoli Abella Goulart ◽  
Maria Clara Faustino Linhares
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Tumor Resection ◽  
Free Survival

Introduction: In advanced breast cancer, local treatment is considered palliative. However, although there are some polemic opinions about the surgical treatment, some of the latest studies have emphasized that in advanced cases primary tumor resection (PTR) is related to better outcomes. This review aims to evaluate how resection of the original tumor impacts women with metastatic breast cancer, considering the most recent studies about this subject. Methods: The search was performed in MEDLINE, Scopus, PMC, Current Contents and Wiley Online Library databases; 23 articles - from 2016 to 2019 - were selected and 11 were included in this review. As inclusion criteria were considered: studies presenting outcomes about resection of the primary tumor, comparison between chemotherapy/ hormone therapy/ targeted cancer therapies and surgical intervention, studies published from 2016 to 2019 and available in English, Spanish or Portuguese. We excluded those which did not approach PTR, did not present outcomes of interest (progression-free survival comparison between PTR and systemic therapy) or only discussed systemic therapy, as well as those published before 2016. Results: It was reported in 6 studies that progression-free survival is better on those who underwent surgery. PTR was also related to longer median overall survival in women submitted to surgery, up to 16 months higher when compared to the ones who were not. Enhanced survival even pertained to surgical groups regardless of tumor size.  Conclusion: Based in the analysis, PTR in metastatic breast cancer can be related to higher overall survival.

A randomized controlled trial comparing primary tumor resection plus systemic therapy with systemic therapy alone in metastatic breast cancer (JCOG1017 PRIM-BC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS588-TPS588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadahiko Shien ◽  
Tomonori Mizutani ◽  
Kiyo Tanaka ◽  
Takayuki Kinoshita ◽  
Fumikata Hara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Primary Tumor Resection ◽  
Her2 Status ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Stage Iv Breast Cancer

TPS588 Background: The possibility of improving the survival of stage IV breast cancer patients by primary tumor resection (PTR) has been reported by several retrospective studies; however, these studies essentially suffer from biases such as arbitrary patient selection, diverse timing of surgery or various regimens of systemic therapy. Five prospective randomized trials including our trial have evaluated the efficacy of PTR for them. Two have reported final results, but those results were inconsistent. Therefore, this subject still remains a hotly debated topic at major breast conferences. Methods: Our trial is being conducted to confirm the superiority of PTR plus systemic therapy over systemic therapy alone in stage IV pts who are sensitive to primary systemic therapy (PST) in this study. The inclusion criteria are untreated pts with histologically confirmed invasive breast cancer with one or more measurable distant metastatic lesions diagnosed by radiological examination.All pts receive PST according to the ER and HER2 status of the primary breast cancer after the first registration. After three months, the pts who are sensitive to PST are randomized to the PTR plus systemic therapy arm or the systemic therapy alone arm. After randomization and surgery in the former arm, or after randomization in the latter arm, the same systemic therapies are continued until progression of diseases and next appropriate regimens are started after that. The primary endpoint is the overall survival, and the secondary endpoints are proportion of pts without tumor progression at the metastatic sites, yearly local recurrence-free survival, proportion of local ulcer/local bleeding, yearly primary tumor resection-free survival, adverse events (AEs) of chemotherapy, operative morbidity, and serious AEs. Sample size for randomized pts was determined to attain at least 80% of power to detect a 6 months difference with one-sided alpha of 0.05.The pts accrual was started in May 2011. Enrollment of 410 pts for randomization is planned over a 7-year accrual period. 307 pts have been randomized until Jan 2017. This trial was registered at UMIN-CTR[umin.ac.jp/ctr/] as UMIN000005586. Clinical trial information: UMIN000005586.

scholarly journals Single arm, phase two study of low-dose metronomic eribulin in metastatic breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavani Chalasani ◽  
Kiah Farr ◽  
Vicky Wu ◽  
Isaac Jenkins ◽  
Alex Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival

Abstract Background Treatment options for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) refractory to anthracyclines and taxanes are limited. In a phase III trial, eribulin demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival compared to treatment of physician’s choice, but had limited tolerability because of neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy. Based on prior studies of alternative treatment schedules with other therapies, we hypothesized that a low-dose metronomic schedule of eribulin would permit patients to remain on treatment more consistently without treatment delays, resulting in longer time to progression, and improved toxicity profile. Methods We conducted a multi-site single arm, phase II trial patients with MBC. All patients were treated with metronomic eribulin (0.9 mg/m2 administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle.) Treatment was continued until the patient developed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or chose to stop the study. Patients must have had prior taxane exposure. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary end points were overall survival, response rate, and clinical benefit rate. Exploratory biomarkers were performed to analyze change in levels of circulating endothelial cells (CECs), circulating endothelial precursors, and carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX) with response to therapy. Findings We consented 86 patients and 59 were evaluable for final analysis. Median age was 59 years; 78% had HER2 negative tumors. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.5 months with overall survival (OS) of 14.3 months. Objective response rate was 15% with clinical benefit rate of 48%. Reported grade 3 neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy were 18% and 5%, respectively. Treatment discontinuation due to toxicity was seen in 3% of patients. Interpretation Metronomic weekly low-dose eribulin is an active and tolerable regimen with significantly less myelosuppression, alopecia, and peripheral neuropathy than is seen with the approved dose and schedule, allowing longer duration of use and disease control, with similar outcomes compared to the standard dose regimen.

Phase III Trial of Epirubicin Plus Paclitaxel Compared With Epirubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide As First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Trial AB01

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (33) ◽  
pp. 8322-8330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth E. Langley ◽  
James Carmichael ◽  
Alison L. Jones ◽  
David A. Cameron ◽  
Wendi Qian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Purpose To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of epirubicin and paclitaxel (EP) with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy (except for adjuvant therapy) were randomly assigned to receive either EP (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2) or EC (epirubicin 75 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2) administered intravenously every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary outcome was progression-free survival; secondary outcome measures were overall survival, response rates, and toxicity. Results Between 1996 and 1999, 705 patients (353 EP patients and 352 EC patients) underwent random assignment. Patient characteristics were well matched between the two groups, and 71% of patients received six cycles of treatment. Objective response rates were 65% for the EP group and 55% for the EC group (P = .015). At the time of analysis, 641 patients (91%) had died. Median progression-free survival time was 7.0 months for the EP group and 7.1 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.24; P = .41), and median overall survival time was 13 months for the EP group and 14 months for the EC group (hazard ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.19; P = .8). EP patients, compared with EC patients, had more grade 3 and 4 mucositis (6% v 2%, respectively; P = .0006) and grade 3 and 4 neurotoxicity (5% v 1%, respectively; P < .0001). Conclusion In terms of progression-free survival and overall survival, there was no evidence of a difference between EP and EC. The data demonstrate no additional advantage to using EP instead of EC as first-line chemotherapy for MBC in taxane-naïve patients.

scholarly journals Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate for Overall Survival in Metastatic Breast Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. ix119-ix120
Author(s):  
C. Beauchemin ◽  
D. Cooper ◽  
M. Lapierre ◽  
L. Yelle ◽  
J. Lachaine
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document