Chemotherapy versus ovarian ablation as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer: impact on health-related quality of life in a randomized trial
- 100 Downloads
Ovarian ablation is an effective adjuvant therapy for primary breast cancer but little is known about its quality of life impact relative to the more widely used adjuvant chemotherapy. This randomized study compared quality of life outcomes of adjuvant ovarian ablation versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluoracil (CMF) chemotherapy.
The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) trial 89-b randomized premenopausal patients with receptor-positive, primary breast cancer between nine cycles of CMF chemotherapy given every 3 weeks and ovarian ablation by oophorectomy. In total, 317 randomized patients were invited to take part in a longitudinal quality of life study with assessments at 1, 3, 5, 9, 15, and 24 months after randomization. The questionnaire included the EORTC QLQ-C30, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and additional items assessing potential symptoms not included in the standard instruments.
After 2 years, 260 women were alive and recurrence-free, and 196 of these (75%) had completed all six questionnaires. Overall, patients in the chemotherapy group had more symptomatology at the first three assessments (i.e., during the 6 months treatment period), except for hot flushes/sweats. There were few differences between groups at later assessments. In chemotherapy patients, the likelihood of preserving ovarian function decreased steeply with increasing age. CMF chemotherapy and ovarian ablation have similar impact on recurrence and survival.
Chemotherapy had more negative impact on health-related quality of life but preserved ovarian function in some younger patients.
Keywordsbreast neoplasms chemotherapy outcomes ovarian ablation quality of life randomized trial
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Supported by the Danish Cancer Society (Grants 91-505 and 94 150 01).
- 3.Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group Adjuvant ovarian ablation versus CMF chemotherapy in premenopausal women with pathological stage II breast carcinoma: the Scottish trial Lancet 341: 1293–1298, 1993Google Scholar
- 4.Ejlertsen B, Dombernowsky P, Mouridsen HT, Kamby C, Kjaer M, Rose C, Andersen KW, Jensen M-B, Bengtsson NO, Bergh J, Comparable effect of ovarian ablation and CMF chemotherapy in premenopausal hormone receptor positive breast cancer patients Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18: 66a, 1999Google Scholar
- 5.Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D, Mesiti M, Romeo D, Sismondi P, Giai M, Genta F, Pacini P, Distante V, Bolognesi A, Aldrighetti D, Farris A, Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus tamoxifen plus ovarian suppression as adjuvant treatment of estrogen receptor-positive pre-/perimenopausal breast cancer patients: results of the Italian Breast Cancer Adjuvant Study Group 02 randomized trial J Clin Oncol 18: 2718–2727, 2000PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Jonat W, Kaufmann M, Sauerbrei W, Blamey R, Cuzick J, Namer M, Fogelman I, de Haes JC, de Matteis A, Stewart A, Eiermann W, Szakolczai I, Palmer M, Schumacher M, Geberth M, Lisboa B 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 J Clin Oncol 20: 4628–4635, 2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Jakesz R, Hausmaninger H, Kubista E, Gnant M, Menzel C, Bauernhofer T, Seifert M, Haider K, Mlineritsch B, Steindorfer P, Kwasny W, Fridrik M, Steger G, Wette V, Samonigg H Randomized adjuvant trial of tamoxifen and goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: evidence for the superiority of treatment with endocrine blockade in premenopausal patients with hormone-responsive breast cancer – Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 5 J Clin Oncol 20: 4621–4627, 2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Castiglione-Gertsch M, O’Neill A, Price KN, Goldhirsch A, Coates AS, Colleoni M, Nasi ML, Bonetti M, Gelber RD Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 1833–1846, 2003PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.van Dam FSAM, Linssen ACG, Engelsman E, van Benthem J, Hanewald GJFP 1980 Life with cytostatic drugs In: Mouridsen HT, Palshof T (eds) Breast Cancer – Experimental and Clinical Aspects Pergamon Press Oxford pp. 229–233Google Scholar
- 15.Hurny C, Bernhard J, Coates AS, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Peterson HF, Gelber RD, Forbes JF, Rudenstam CM, Simoncini E, Crivellari D, Goldhirsch A, Senn HJ Impact of adjuvant therapy on quality of life in women with node-positive operable breast cancer. International Breast Cancer Study Group Lancet 347: 1279–1284 1996PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.de Haes H, Olschewski M, Kaufmann M, Schumacher M, Jonat W, Sauerbrei W Quality of life in goserelin-treated versus cyclophosphamide + methotrexate + fluorouracil-treated premenopausal and perimenopausal patients with node-positive, early breast cancer: the Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Trialists Group J Clin Oncol 21: 4510–4516 2003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Taylor CW, Green S, Dalton WS, Martino S, Rector D, Ingle JN, Robert NJ, Budd GT, Paradelo JC, Natale RB, Bearden JD, Mailliard JA, Osborne CK Multicenter randomized clinical trial of goserelin versus surgical ovariectomy in premenopausal patients with receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: an intergroup study J Clin Oncol 16: 994–999 1998PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group: DBCG-89. Program for Treatment and Follow-Up of Patients With Primary, Operable Breast Cancer (In Danish). DBCG-Sekretariatet, Copenhagen, 1989Google Scholar
- 23.Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishmann SB, de Haes JCJM, Kaasa S, Klee M, Osoba D, Razavi D, Rofe PB, Schraub S, Sneeuw K, Sullivan M, Takeda F The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology J Natl Cancer Inst 85: 365–376 1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Fayers PM, Aaronson N, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D, Bottomley A, on behalf of the EORTC Quality of Life Group: The EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual. 3rd ed. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, 2001Google Scholar
- 34.Sprangers MAG, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, Franzini L, Williams A, de Haes HCJM, Hopwood P, Cull A, Aaronson NK The EORTC Breast Cancer-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Module (QLQ-BR23): first results from a three-country field study J Clin Oncol 14: 2756–2768 1996PubMedGoogle Scholar