Advertisement

Adjuvant Chemotherapy

  • M. Tubiana-Hulin
  • M. Gardner
Chapter
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 151)

Apparently localized breast cancer which has been treated with optimal locoregional therapy can recur months or years later, ultimately resulting in death. This is generally believed to be due to the development of occult micrometastases disseminated in the body and already present at the time of the initial surgery. Destruction of these micrometastases is the aim of adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapies have been widely used since the 1970s and, although the absolute survival benefit they confer is modest (10%), they have been credited, together with screening and improvement of loco-regional treatment, for the reduction in breast cancer mortality observed in recent decades.

Keywords

Breast Cancer Acute Myeloid Leukemia Adjuvant Chemotherapy Positive Axillary Node Annual Event Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: An overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1687–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fisher B, Fisher ER, Redmond C. Ten-year results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) clinical trial evaluating the use of L-phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM) in the management of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:929–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Tancini G, et al. Current status of Milan adjuvant chemotherapy trials for node-positive and node-negative breast cancer. NCI Monogr. 1986;4:45–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. 133 randomised trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1992;339:1–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: An overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1998;352:930–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buzdar AU, Kau SW, Smith TL, et al. Ten-year results of FAC adjuvant chemotherapy trial in breast cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 1989;12:123–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonneterre J, Roche 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;23:2686–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hery M, Bonneterre J, Roche H, et al. Epirubicin-based chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for poor prognosis, node-negative breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 03 trial. Bull Cancer. 2006;93:E109–E114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher B, Redmond C, Wickerham DL, et al. Doxorubicin-containing regimens for the treatment of stage II breast cancer: The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7(5):572–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moliterni A, Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, et al. Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil with and without doxorubicin in the adjuvant treatment of resectable breast cancer with one to three positive axillary nodes. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:1124–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV, et al. Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: Results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-15. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:1483–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Misset JL, di Palma M, Delgado M. Adjuvant treatment of node-positive breast cancer with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, fluorouracil, and vincristine versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: Final report after a 16-year median follow-up duration. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1136–1145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    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;19:3103–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Levine MN, Pritchard KI, Bramwell VH, et al. Randomized trial comparing cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer: Update of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Trial MA5. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5166–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Poole CJ, Earl HM, Hiller L, et al. Epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1851–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tancini G, Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, et al. Adjuvant CMF in breast cancer: Comparative 5-year results of 12 versus 6 cycles. J Clin Oncol. 1983;1:2–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Combination adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer. Inadequacy of a single perioperative cycle. The Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:677–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fumoleau P, Kerbrat P, Romestaing P, et al. Randomized trial comparing six versus three cycles of epirubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal, node-positive breast cancer patients: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Study Group 01 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:298–305.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hryniuk WM, Goodyear M. The calculation of received dose intensity. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:1935–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    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;330:1253–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bonneterre J, Roche H, Bremond A. Results of a randomized trial of adjuvant therapy with FEC 50 versus FEC 100 in high risk node positive breast cancer patients. Proc ASCO 1998;17:473.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, DeCillis 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 and Bowel Project B-25. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:3374–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fisher B, Jeong JH, Dignam J, et al. Findings from recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project adjuvant studies in stage I breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2001;30:62–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Peters WP, Dansey RD, Klein JL, et al. High-dose chemotherapy and peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation in the treatment of breast cancer. Oncologist. 2000;5:1–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    The Scandinavian breast cancer study group 9401. Results of a randomized adjuvant breast breast cancer study with high dose chemotherapy with CTC [subcript b] supported by autologous bone marrow stem cells versus dose escalated and tailored FEC therapy. Proc ASCO. 1999;18,A3.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU. RESPONSE: re: randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy and blood cell autografts for high-risk primary breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1273.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rodenhuis S, Bontenbal M, Beex LV, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem-cell rescue for high-risk breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:7–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bonadonna G, Zambetti M, Valagussa P. Sequential or alternating doxorubicin and CMF regimens in breast cancer with more than three positive nodes. Ten-year results. JAMA. 1995;273:542–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ferguson T, Wilcken N, Vagg R, et al. Taxanes for adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD004421.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gehl J, Boesgaard M, Paaske T, et al. Combined doxorubicin and paclitaxel in advanced breast cancer: Effective and cardiotoxic. Ann Oncol. 1996;7:687–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gianni I, Baselga J, Eiermann W, et al. ECTO Study Group European Cooperative Trial in Operable Breast Cancer: Improved freedom from progression from adding paclitaxel to doxorubicin followed by cyclosphamide methotrexate and fluorouracil. Proc ASCO. 2005;23,A513.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gianni L, Munzone E, Capri G, et al. Paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion in combination with bolus doxorubicin in women with untreated metastatic breast cancer: High antitumor efficacy and cardiac effects in a dose-finding and sequence-finding study. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:2688–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Amadori D, Fabbri M. [Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line treatment in women with metastatic breast carcinoma: final results of a phase III multicenter randomized trial]. Tumori. 2001;87:A18–A19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mamounas EP, Bryant J, Lembersky B, et al. Paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer: Results from NSABP B-28. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:3686–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: First report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1431–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chan S, Friedrichs K, Noel D, et al. Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:2341–2354.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2302–2313.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: The FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5664–5671.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jones SE, Savin MA, Holmes FA, et al. Phase III trial comparing doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide with docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant therapy for operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5381–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Goldstein LJ, O'Neill J, Sparano J, et al. E2197:Phase III AT (doxorubicin/docetaxel) vs. AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) in the adjuvant treatment of node positive and high risk node positive breast cancer. Proc ASCO. 2005;23:A512.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    O'Shaughnessy J. Gemcitabine combination chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: Phase II experience. Oncology (Williston Park). 2003;17:15–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Poole C. Adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: the tAnGo trial. Oncology (Williston Park). 2004;18:23–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Perez E, Muss HB. Optimizing adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2005;19:1759–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shapiro CL, Recht A. Side effects of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1997–2008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Steinherz LJ, Steinherz PG, Tan CT, et al. Cardiac toxicity 4 to 20 years after completing anthracycline therapy. JAMA. 1991;266:1672–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Steinherz LJ. Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:827–828.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Von Hoff DD, Rozencweig M, Layard M, et al. Daunomycin-induced cardiotoxicity in children and adults. A review of 110 cases. Am J Med. 1977;62:200–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Von Hoff DD, Layard MW, Basa P, et al. Risk factors for doxorubicin-induced congestive heart failure. Ann Intern Med. 1979;91:710–17.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Keefe DL. Anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy. Semin Oncol. 2001;28:2–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fumoleau P, Roche H, Kerbrat P, et al. Long-term cardiac toxicity after adjuvant epirubicin-based chemotherapy in early breast cancer: French Adjuvant Study Group results. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:85–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gianni L, Dombernowsky P, Sledge G, et al. Cardiac function following combination therapy with paclitaxel and doxorubicin: an analysis of 657 women with advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2001;12:1067–1073.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Praga C, Bergh J, Bliss J, et al. Risk of acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome in trials of adjuvant epirubicin for early breast cancer: Correlation with doses of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4179–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Smith RE, Bryant J, DeCillis A, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome after doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide adjuvant therapy for operable breast cancer: The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Experience. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1195–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Smith RE. Risk for the development of treatment-related acute myelocytic leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome among patients with breast cancer: Review of the literature and the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Clin Breast Cancer. 2003;4:273–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Smith SM, Le Beau MM, Huo D, et al. Clinical-cytogenetic associations in 306 patients with therapy-related myelodysplasia and myeloid leukemia: The University of Chicago series. Blood. 2003;102:43–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Le Deley MC, Suzan F, Cutuli B, et al. Anthracyclines, mitoxantrone, radiotherapy, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: Risk factors for leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome after breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:292–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Linassier C, Barin C, Calais G, et al. Early secondary acute myelogenous leukemia in breast cancer patients after treatment with mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil and radiation therapy. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:1289–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hershman D, Neugut AI, Jacobson JS, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome following use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors during breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:196–205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, et al. Toxicity of older and younger patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer: The Cancer and Leukemia Group B Experience. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3699–3704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hudis C, Citron ML, Berry D, et al. Five year follow-up of INT C9741: Dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy (CRx) is safe and effective. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;94:A41.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cooper JA, White DA, Matthay RA. Drug-induced pulmonary disease. Part 1: Cytotoxic drugs. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1986;133:321–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Malik SW, Myers JL, DeRemee RA, et al. Lung toxicity associated with cyclophosphamide use. Two distinct patterns. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1996;154:1851–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Koyama H, Wada T, Nishizawa Y, et al. Cyclophosphamide-induced ovarian failure and its therapeutic significance in patients with breast cancer. Cancer. 1977;39:1403–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tham YL, Sexton K, Weiss H, et al. The rates of chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea in patients treated with adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by a taxane. Am J Clin Oncol. 2007;30:126–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ganz PA, Desmond KA, Leedham B, et al. Quality of life in long-term, disease-free survivors of breast cancer: A follow-up study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:39–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Kornblith AB, Herndon JE, Weiss RB, et al. Long-term adjustment of survivors of early-stage breast carcinoma, 20 years after adjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. 2003;98:679–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Andrykowski MA, Curran SL, Lightner R. Off-treatment fatigue in breast cancer survivors: a controlled comparison. J Behav Med. 1998;21:1–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Bower JE, Ganz PA, Desmond KA, et al. Fatigue in long-term breast carcinoma survivors: A longitudinal investigation. Cancer. 2006;106:751–758.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Broeckel JA, Jacobsen PB, Horton J, et al. Characteristics and correlates of fatigue after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:1689–1696.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Goldstein D, Bennett B, Friedlander M, et al. Fatigue states after cancer treatment occur both in association with, and independent of, mood disorder: A longitudinal study. BMC Cancer. 2006;6:240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Nieboer P, Buijs C, Rodenhuis S, et al. Fatigue and relating factors in high-risk breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant standard or high-dose chemotherapy: A longitudinal study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8296–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Brezden CB, Phillips KA, Abdolell M, et al. Cognitive function in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2695–2701.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Wefel JS, Lenzi R, Theriault RL, et al. The cognitive sequelae of standard-dose adjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast carcinoma: Results of a prospective, randomized, longitudinal trial. Cancer. 2004;100:2292–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Van Dam FS, Schagen SB, Muller MJ, et al. Impairment of cognitive function in women receiving adjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: High-dose versus standard-dose chemotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:210–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cinieri S, Orlando L, Fedele P, et al. Adjuvant strategies in breast cancer: New prospectives, questions and reflections at the end of 2007 St Gallen International Expert Consensus Conference. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:vi63–vi65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, et al. Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2007. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:1133–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Gennari A, Sormani MP, Pronzato P, et al. HER2 status and efficacy of adjuvant anthracyclines in early breast cancer: A pooled analysis of randomized trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:14–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Torrisi R, Balduzzi A, Ghisini R, et al. Tailored preoperative treatment of locally advanced triple negative (hormone receptor negative and HER2 negative) breast cancer with epirubicin, cisplatin, and infusional fluorouracil followed by weekly paclitaxel. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2008;62(4)667–72.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Yothers G, et al. Adjuvant therapy for very young women with breast cancer: Need for tailored treatments. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2001;93:44–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Tubiana-Hulin
    • 1
  • M. Gardner
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre René Huguenin St CloudSaint-CloudFrance

Personalised recommendations