Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Traitement adjuvant du cancer du sein n’exprimant pas HER2

  • Chapter
Le cancer du sein

Part of the book series: Oncologie pratique ((ONCOLPRAT))

  • 529 Accesses

Abstrait

Le cancer du sein reste au premier rang des causes de décès par cancer chez la femme en France, avec 11637 décès observés en 2000. Deux éléments semblent avoir contribué à ľamélioration des taux de survie, constante durant ces vingt dernières années: la pratique du dépistage par mammographie et les progrès réalisés dans la prise en charge thérapeutique, avec, en particulier, le développement de traitements adjuvants de plus en plus efficaces et destinés à un nombre plus important de patientes. La dernière actualisation de la méta-analyse des traitements adjuvants dans le cancer du sein localisé confirme leur impact positif sur la survie globale des patientes. Surtout, elle démontre la baisse de la mortalité par cancer du sein dans les pays occidentaux depuis les années 1990 alors que ľincidence augmente (1). Cette tendance est surtout nette aux États-Unis et au Royaume-Uni où la mortalité était particulièrement élevée alors qu’elle est moins spectaculaire en France où la mortalité était plus faible et reste stable avec une orientation à la baisse (2, 3). Une modélisation statistique sur les données aux États-Unis entre 1975 et 2000 montre une contribution relativement équivalente à la fois du dépistage par mammographie et des traitements adjuvants (4).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’Collaborative Group (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365: 1687–717

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Veronesi U, Boyle P, Goldhirsch A et al. (2005) Breast cancer. Lancet 365: 1727–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hill C, Doyon F (2005) La fréquence des cancers en France en 2000 et son évolution depuis 1950. Bull Cancer 9: 7–11

    Google Scholar 

  4. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK et al. (2005) Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353: 1784–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’Collaborative Group (1998) Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 351: 1451–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, Wolmark N (2001) Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen for lymph node-negative breast cancer: updated findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-14 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 93: 684–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Stewart HJ, Prescott RJ, Forrest AP (2001) Scottish adjuvant tamoxifen trial: a randomized study updated to 15 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 93: 456–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bryant J, Fisher B, Dignam J (2001) Duration of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr (30): 56–61

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chang J, Powles TJ, Ashley SE et al. (1996) The effect of tamoxifen and hormone replacement therapy on serum cholesterol, bone mineral density and coagulation factors in healthy postmenopausal women participating in a randomised, controlled tamoxifen prevention study. Ann Oncol 7: 671–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Beatson GT (1896) On the treatment of inoperable cases of carcinoma of the mamma: suggestions for a new method of treatment with illustrative cases. Lancet ii: 104–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rivkin SE, Green S, O’Sullivan J et al. (1996) Adjuvant CMFVP versus adjuvant CMFVP plus ovariectomy for premenopausal, node-positive, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 14: 46–51

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Shapiro CL, Recht A (2001) Side effects of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 344: 1997–2008

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group (1993) Adjuvant ovarian ablation versus CMF chemotherapy in premenopausal women with pathological stage II breast carcinoma: the Scottish trial. Lancet 341: 1293–8

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ejlertsen B, Mouridsen HT, Jensen MB et al. (2006) Similar efficacy for ovarian ablation compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil: from a randomized comparison of premenopausal patients with node-positive, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24: 4956–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Jonat W, Kaufmann M, Sauerbrei W et al. (2002) 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: 4628–35

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaufmann M, Jonat W, Blamey R et al. (2003) Survival analyses from the ZEBRA study. Goserelin (Zoladex) versus CMF in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 39: 1711–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmid P, Untch M, Wallwiener D et al. (2002) Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF) versus hormonal ablation with leuprorelin acetate as adjuvant treatment of node-positive, premenopausal breast cancer patients: preliminary results of the TABLE-study (Takeda Adjuvant Breast cancer study with Leuprorelin Acetate). Anticancer Res 22: 2325–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Castiglione-Gertsch M, O’Neill A, Price KN et al. (2003) Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 1833–46

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D et al. (2000) 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: 2718–27

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Jakesz R, Hausmaninger H, Kubista E et al. (2002) 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: 4621–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Roche H, Kerbrat P, Bonneterre J et al. (2006) Complete hormonal blockade versus epirubicin-based chemotherapy in premenopausal, one to three node-positive, and hormone-receptor positive, early breast cancer patients: 7-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 06 randomised trial. Ann Oncol 17: 1221–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD et al. (2005) Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005. Ann Oncol 16: 1569–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD et al. (2003) Meeting highlights: updated international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 21: 3357–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel (2001) National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst 93: 979–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Davidson NE, O’Neill AM, Vukov AM et al. (2005) Chemoendocrine therapy for premenopausal women with axillary lymph node-positive, steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: results from INT 0101 (E5188). J Clin Oncol 23: 5973–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Baum M, Hackshaw A, Houghton J et al. (2006) Adjuvant goserelin in pre-menopausal patients with early breast cancer: Results from the ZIPP study. European Journal of Cancer 42: 895–904

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Colozza M, de Azambuja E, Cardoso F et al. (2006) Breast Cancer: Achievements in Adjuvant Systemic Therapies in the Pre-Genomic Era. Oncologist 11: 111–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. ATAC’s trialist group (2002) Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trial. Lancet 359: 2131–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Baum M, Buzdar A, Cuzick J et al. (2003) Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination) trial efficacy and safety update analyses. Cancer 98: 1802–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M et al. (2005) Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’ adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet 365: 60–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Thurlimann B, Keshaviah A, Coates AS et al. (2005) A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353: 2747–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S et al. (2005) Randomized trial of letrozole following tamoxifen as extended adjuvant therapy in receptor-positive breast cancer: updated findings from NCIC CTG MA.17. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 1262–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Whelan TJ, Goss PE, Ingle JN et al. (2005) Assessment of quality of life in MA.17: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of letrozole after 5 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women. J Clin Oncol 23: 6931–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Wasan KM, Goss PE, Pritchard PH et al. (2005) The influence of letrozole on serum lipid concentrations in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer who have completed 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen (NCIC CTG MA.17L). Ann Oncol 16: 707–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Coombes RC, Hall E, Gibson LJ et al. (2004) A randomized trial of exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med 350: 1081–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Coombes GA et al. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2006

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fallowfield LJ, Bliss JM, Porter LS et al. (2006) Quality of life in the intergroup exemestane study: a randomized trial of exemestane versus continued tamoxifen after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24: 910–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Jakesz R, Jonat W, Gnant M et al. (2005) Switching of postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer to anastrozole after 2 years’ adjuvant tamoxifen: combined results of ABCSG trial 8 and ARNO 95 trial. Lancet 366: 455–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Puntoni M et al. (2005) Switching to anastrozole versus continued tamoxifen treatment of early breast cancer: preliminary results of the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole Trial. J Clin Oncol 23: 5138–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Buzdar A, Howell A, Cuzick J et al. (2006) Comprehensive side-effect profile of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: longterm safety analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 7: 633–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Winer EP, Hudis C, Burstein HJ et al. (2005) American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on the use of aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: status report 2004. J Clin Oncol 23: 619–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Punglia RS, Kuntz KM, Winer EP et al. (2005) Optimizing adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: a decision analysis. J Clin Oncol 23: 5178–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Harris EE, Christensen VJ, Hwang WT et al. (2005) Impact of concurrent versus sequential tamoxifen with radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer patients undergoing breast conservation treatment. J Clin Oncol 23: 11–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Whelan T, Levine M (2005) Radiation therapy and tamoxifen: concurrent or sequential? That is the question. J Clin Oncol 3: 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pierce LJ, Hutchins LF, Green SR et al. (2005) Sequencing of tamoxifen and radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23: 24–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Ahn PH, Vu HT, Lannin D et al. (2005) Sequence of radiotherapy with tamoxifen in conservatively managed breast cancer does not affect local relapse rates. J Clin Oncol 23: 17–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’collaborative Group (1992) Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. Lancet 339: 1–15, 71–85

    Google Scholar 

  48. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’collaborative Group (1998) Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 352: 930–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Muss HB, Woolf S, Berry D et al. (2005) Adjuvant chemotherapy in older and younger women with lymph node-positive breast cancer. Jama 293: 1073–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Bonadonna G, Moliterni A, Zambetti M et al. (2005) 30 years’follow up of randomised studies of adjuvant CMF in operable breast cancer: cohort study. Bmj 330: 217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hutchins LF, Green SJ, Ravdin PM et al. (2005) Randomized, controlled trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil with and without tamoxifen for high-risk, nodenegative breast cancer: treatment results of Intergroup Protocol INT-0102. J Clin Oncol 23: 8313–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Coombes RC, Bliss JM, Wils J et al. (1996) Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in premenopausal women with axillary node-positive operable breast cancer: results of a randomized trial. The International Collaborative Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 14: 35–45

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Poole CJ, Earl HM, Hiller L et al. (2006) Epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355: 1851–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Levine MN, Pritchard KI, Bramwell VH et al. (2005) 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 23: 5166–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Pritchard KI, Shepherd LE, O’Malley FP et al. (2006) HER2 and responsiveness of breast cancer to adjuvant chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 354: 2103–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Tanner M, Isola J, Wiklund T et al. (2006) Topoisomerase IIalpha Gene Amplification Predicts Favorable Treatment Response to Tailored and Dose-Escalated Anthracycline-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy in HER-2/neu-Amplified Breast Cancer: Scandinavian Breast Group Trial 9401. J Clin Oncol 24: 2428–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV et al. (1990) 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 8: 1483–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Piccart MJ, Di Leo A, Beauduin M, et al. (2001) 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 19: 3103–10

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Henderson IC, Berry DA, Demetri GD et al. (2003) 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 21: 976–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. French Adjuvant Study Group (2001) Benefit of 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 19: 602–11.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Fumoleau P, Kerbrat P, Romestaing P et al. (2003) 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 Adjuvvant Study Group 01 trial. J Clin Oncol 21: 298–305

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Campone M, Roche H, Kerbrat P et al. (2005) Secondary leukemia after epirubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer patients: 16 years experience of the French Adjuvant Study Group. Ann Oncol 16: 1343–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Zambetti M, Moliterni A, Materazzo C et al. (2001) Long-Term Cardiac Sequelae in Operable Breast Cancer Patients Given Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Doxorubicin and Breast Irradiation. J Clin Oncol 19: 37–43

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Wils JA, Bliss JM, Marty M et al. (1999) Epirubicin plus tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone in node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer: A randomized trial of the International Collaborative Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 17: 1988–98

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D et al. (1992) Chemotherapy versus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in node-positive, œstrogen-receptor positive breast cancer patients. An update at 7 years of the 1st GROCTA (Breast Cancer Adjuvant Chemo-Hormone Therapy Cooperative Group) trial. Eur J Cancer 28: 673–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Fisher B, Anderson S, Tan-Chiu E et al. (2001) Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for axillary node-negative, estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-23. J Clin Oncol 19: 931–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. International Breast Cancer Study Group (2002) Endocrine responsiveness and tailoring adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 94: 1054–65

    Google Scholar 

  68. Albain K, Barlow WE, O’Malley FP (2004) Concurrent (CAFT) versus sequential (CAF-T) chemohormonal therapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil, tamoxifene) versus T alone for post-ménopausal, node positive, estrogen (ER) and/or progesterone (PgR) receptor-positive breast cancer: mature outcomes and new biologic correlates on phase III intergroup trial 0100 (SWOG-8814). Breast Cancer Res Treat 88: abstract 37

    Google Scholar 

  69. Pico C, Martin M, Jara C et al. (2004) Epirubicin-cyclophosphamide adjuvant chemotherapy plus tamoxifen administered concurrently versus sequentially: randomized phase III trial in postmenopausal node-positive breast cancer patients. A GEICAM 9401 study. Ann Oncol 15: 79–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Dang C, Hudis C (2006) Adjuvant taxanes in the treatment of breast cancer: no longer at the tip of the iceberg. Clin Breast Cancer 7: 51–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Mamounas EP, Bryant J, Lembersky B et al. (2005) Paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-28. J Clin Oncol 23: 3686–96

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M et al. (2006) Sequential Adjuvant Epirubicin-Based and Docetaxel Chemotherapy for Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: The FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. J Clin Oncol 24: 5664–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J et al. (2005) Adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 52: 2302–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Goldstein LJ, O`Neill A, Sparano JA et al. (2005) Phase III AT (doxorubicin/docetaxel) vs AC (doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) in the adjuvant treatment of node positive and high risk node negative breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 23: 7S 512 abstract

    Google Scholar 

  75. Brain EG, Bachelot T, Serin D et al. (2005) Life-threatening sepsis associated with adjuvant doxorubicin plus docetaxel for intermediate-risk breast cancer. Jama 293: 2367–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Berry DA, Cirrincione C, Henderson IC et al. (2006) Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer. JAMA 295: 1658–67

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Bria E, Nistico C, Cuppone F et al. (2006) Benefit of taxanes as adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer: pooled analysis of 15,500 patients. Cancer 106: 2337–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Jones SE, Savin MA, Holmes FA et al. (2006) Phase III Trial Comparing Doxorubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide With Docetaxel Plus Cyclophosphamide As Adjuvant Therapy for Operable Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 24: 5381–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C, Hudis C et al. (2003) Randomized trial of dosedense 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 21: 1431–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Venturini M, Del Mastro L, Aitini E et al. (2005) Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer patients: results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 1724–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. von Minckwitz G, Graf E, Geberth M et al. (2006) CMF versus goserelin as adjuvant therapy for node-negative, hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer in premenopausal patients: a randomised trial (GABG trial IV-A-93). Eur J Cancer 242: 1780–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Ryan PD, Goss PE (2006) Adjuvant hormonal therapy in peri-and postmenopausal breast cancer. Oncologist 11: 718–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Coates AS, Keshaviah A, Thurlimann B et al. (2007) Five years of litrozole compared with tamoxifen as initial adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with endocrine — responsive early breast cancer: update of study BIG 1-98. J Clin Oncol 25: 486–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Guglielmini P et al. (2006) Switching to anastrozole versus continued tamoxifen treatment of early breast cancer. Updated results of the Italian tamoxifen anastrozole (ITA) trial. Ann Oncol 17 Suppl 7: vii10–vii14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S et al. (2003) A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 349: 1793–802

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Valero V et al. (2002) Evaluation of paclitaxel in adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with operable breast cancer: preliminary data of a prospective randomized trial. Clin Cancer Res 8: 1073–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Martin M, Rodriguez-Lescure A, Ruiz A et al. (2005) Multicenter, randomized phase III study of adjuvant chemotherapy for node positive breast cancer comparing cycles of FE90C versus 4 ccyles of FEC90C followed by 8 weekly paclitaxel administrations: interim efficacy analysis of GEICAM 9906 trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 94(suppl1): S20 abstract 39

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut Curie, 26, rue ďUlm, 75005, Paris

    J. -Y. Pierga

Authors
  1. J. -Y. Pierga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag France

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pierga, J.Y. (2007). Traitement adjuvant du cancer du sein n’exprimant pas HER2. In: Le cancer du sein. Oncologie pratique. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-287-36073-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-287-36073-2_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-287-36071-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-287-36073-2

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation