Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dose in (Adjuvant) Chemotherapy of Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer

Part of the book series: Cancer Treatment and Research ((CTAR,volume 151))

  • 1212 Accesses

Dose and dose intensity issues in breast cancer have been extensively discussed during the past few years; however, precise information is rare. Pharmacokinetic data are limited for the majority of the compounds we use. If available at all they show a large interindividual variability. Dose response relationships, even for the most commonly used drugs, have not been well investigated. In general, dosing within given chemotherapy regimens is far more toxicity than efficacy driven. In combinations, tolerable doses of single drugs are generally lower than in sequential regimens. It is therefore difficult to investigate separately the effects of dose intensity, dose density and scheduling. The following text tries to resume the available important clinical data. As remission rates in metastatic disease, especially in high-dose settings, are questionable surrogate parameters for outcome, the text focuses, as far as possible, on survival data from adjuvant randomized trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Skipper HE, Schabel FM Jr, Mellett LB, et al. Implications of biochemical, cytokinetic, pharmacologic, and toxicologic relationships in the design of optimal therapeutic schedules. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1970;54(6):431–50.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Norton L, Simon R. The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited. Cancer Treat Rep. 1986;70(1):163–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hryniuk W, Frei E III, Wright FA. A single scale for comparing dose-intensity of all chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer: Summation dose-intensity. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(9):3137–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham DL, De Cillis A, 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 an Bowel Project B22. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1858–69.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham DL, De Cillis 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 an Bowel Project B25, J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:3374–88.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bonneterre J, Rochè 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. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(12):2686–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. French Adjuvant Study Group, Benefit fo 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. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(3):602–11.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 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;21:976–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Engelsman E, Klijn JCM, Rubens RD, et al. “Classical” CMF versus a 3-weekly intravenous CMF schedule in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27(8):966–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bonnadonna G, Valagussa P, et al. Dose-response effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. New Engl J Med. 1981;304:10–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Piccart, MJ, Di Leo A, Beauduin M, et al. Phase III trial comparing two dose levels of epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(12):3103–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wood WC, Budman DR, Korzun AH, et al. Dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for Stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1994;330(18):1253–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Linden HM, Haskell CM, Green SJ, et al. Sequenced compared with simultaneous anthracycline and cyclophosphamide in high-risk Stage I and II breast cancer: Final Analysis from INT-0137 (S9313). J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(6):656–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: First report of intergroup Trial C 9741/ Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(8):1431–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Francis P, Crown J, Di Leo A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with sequential or concurrent anthracycline and docetaxel: Breast International Group 02 98 Randomized Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(2):121–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(16):1663–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Moebus V, Lueck HJ, Thomssen C, et al. Dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin (E), paclitaxel (T) and cyclophosphamide (C) (ETC) in comparison to conventional dosed chemotherapy in high breast cancer patients (4+ LN). Mature results of an AGO trial. San Antonio Breast cancer symposium (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tallman MS, Gray R, Robert NJ, et al. Conventional adjuvant chemotherapy with or without high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation in high-risk breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(1):17–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Leonard R, Lind M, Twelves C, et al. Conventional adjuvant chemotherapy versus single-cycle, autograft-supported, high-dose, late-intensification chemotherapy in high-risk breast cancer patients: A randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(14):1076–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Roché H, Viens P, Biron P, et al. High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer: the French PEGASE experience. Cancer Control. 2003;10(1):42–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zander AR, Kroeger N, Schmoor C, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell support compared with standard-dose chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with 10 or more positive lymph nodes: First results of a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(12):2273–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Zander AR, Schmoor C, Kröger N, et al. Randomized trial of high-dose adjuvant chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell support versus standard-dose chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with 10 or more positive lymph nodes: overall survival after 6 years of follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(6):1082–9.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Moore HCF, Green SJ, Gralow JR, et al. Intensive dose-dense compared with high-dose adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk operable breast cancer: Southwest Oncology Group/Intergroup Study 9623. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(13):1677–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Rodenhuis S, Bontenbal M, Beex LV, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoetic stem-cell rescue for high risk breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(1):7–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Peters W, Rosner GL, Vredenburgh JJ, et al. Prospective, randomized comparison of high-dose chemotherapy with stem-cell support versus intermediate-dose chemotherapy after surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy in women with high-risk primary breast cancer: A report of CALGB 9082, SWOG 9114, and NCIC MA-13. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(10):2191–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bergh J, Wiklund T, Erikstein B, et al. Tailored fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: A randomised trial. Lancet. 2000;356(9239):1384–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gianni A, Sienna S, Bregni M, et al. Efficacy, toxicity, and applicability of high-dose sequential chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer with 10 or more involved axillary nodes: Five-year results. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(6):2312–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Nitz U, Mohrmann S, Fischer J, et al. Comparison of rapidly cycled tandem high-dose chemotherapy plus peripheral-blood stem-cell support versus dose-dense conventional chemotherapy for adjuvant treatment of high-risk breast cancer: Results of a multicentre phase III trial. Lancet. 2005;366(9501):1935–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Basser R, O'Neill A, Martinelli G, et al. Multicycle dose-intensive chemotherapy for women with high-risk primary breast cancer: Results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 15-95. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(3):370–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Berry D, Ueno N, Johnson MM, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell support versus standard-dose chemotherapy: Meta-analysis of individual patient data from 15 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;106(Suppl 1):Abstr 11.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gluz O, Nitz UA, Harbeck N, et al. Triple-negative high-risk breast cancer derives particular benefit from dose intensification of adjuvant chemotherapy: Results of WSG AM-01 trial. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(5):861–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Niderrhein Breast Centre, Mönchengladbach, Germany

    Ulrike. Nitz

Authors
  1. Ulrike. Nitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrike. Nitz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Inselspital, Univ. Bern, Bern, 3010, Switzerland

    Monica Castiglione

  2. Inst. Jules Bordet, Universite Libre Bruxelles, Bd. de Waterloo 125, Bruxelles, 1000, Belgium

    Martine J. Piccart

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nitz, U. (2009). Dose in (Adjuvant) Chemotherapy of Breast Cancer. In: Castiglione, M., Piccart, M. (eds) Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer. Cancer Treatment and Research, vol 151. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75115-3_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75115-3_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-75114-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-75115-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation