Adjuvant Systemic Treatment for Breast Cancer: An Overview

  • Rachel NirsimlooEmail author
  • David A. CameronEmail author


The survival of patients with early breast cancer has significantly improved in recent years. Many factors have contributed to this, including the widespread use of postoperative, adjuvant, systemic therapy. This chapter reviews the rationale and both early and more recent clinical trials that provide the evidence supporting this approach. It discusses data for chemotherapy, endocrine therapy and anti-HER2 blockade, and considers more recent data with bisphosphonates. It also reviews emerging data from multi-parameter genomic tests that enhance prognostication and may have predictive use with regard to chemotherapy sensitivity. It will not propose “best regimens” as the choice of agents depends on a number of factors which can be specific to the individual patient and/or the centre where they are being treated.


Breast cancer Adjuvant Chemotherapy Endocrine therapy Trastuzumab Meta-analysis Survival Genomic testing 


  1. 1.
    Dawood S, Austin L, Cristofanilli M. Cancer stem cells: implications for cancer therapy. Oncology (Williston Park) 2014;28(12):1101–7, 1110.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang S, Balch C, Chan MW, et al. Identification and characterization of ovarian cancer-initiating cells from primary human tumors. Cancer Res. 2008;68:4311–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tian T, Olson S, Whitacre JM, Harding A. The origins of cancer robustness and evolvability. Integr Biol (Camb). 2011;3:17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boon T, Cerottini JC, Van den Eynde B, et al. Tumor antigens recognized by T lymphocytes. Annu Rev Immunol. 1994;12:337–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adams S, Gray RJ, Demaria S, et al. Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancers from two phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trials: ECOG 2197 and ECOG 1199. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):2959–66.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ali HR, Provenzano E, Dawson SJ, et al. Association between CD8 + T-cell infiltration and breast cancer survival in 12,439 patients. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(8):1536–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loi S, Michiels S, Salgado R, et al. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes are prognostic in triple negative breast cancer and predictive for trastuzumab benefit in early breast cancer: results from the FinHER trial. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(8):1544–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loi S, Sirtaine N, Piette F, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in a phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial in node-positive breast cancer comparing the addition of docetaxel to doxorubicin with doxorubicin-based chemotherapy: BIG 02-98. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(7):860–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anon. Review of mortality results in randomized trials in early breast cancer. Lancet 1984; 2:1205.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, et al. Twenty-five year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:567–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisher B, Ravdin RG, Ausman RK, et al. Surgical adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer of the breast: results of a decade of cooperative investigation. Ann Surg. 1968;168:337–56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fisher B, Carbone P, Economou SG, et al. 1-Phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM) in the management of primary breast cancer. A report of early findings. N Engl J Med. 1975;292:117–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greenspan EM, Fieber M, Lesnick G, Edelman S. Response of advanced breast cancer to the combination of the anti-metabolite methotrexate and the alkylating agent thiotepa. J Mt Sinai Hosp. 1963;30:246–67.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bonadonna G, Brusamolino E, Valagussa P, et al. Combination chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1976;294:405–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Ravdin PM, et al. Breast Cancer Intergroup of North America. Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;374:2055–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mansour EG, Gray R, Shatila AH, et al. Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk node-negative breast cancer. An intergroup study. N Engl J Med. 1989;320:485–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abrams JS. Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer–results from the USA consensus conference. Breast Cancer. 2001;8:298–304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2005;365:1687–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Adjuvant chemotherapy in oestrogen receptor poor breast cancer: patient level meta-analyses of randomized trials. Lancet Oncol. 2008;371(9606):29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2012;379:432–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    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(7):542–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Earl HM, Hiller L, Dunn JA, et al. NEAT: National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trail—toxicity, delivered dose intensity and quality of life. Br J Cancer. 2008;99:1226–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wani MC, Taylor HL, Wall ME, et al. Plant antitumor agents VI. Isolation and structure of taxol, a novel antileukemic and antitumour agent from taxus brevifolia. J Am Chem Sco 1971 96: 2325–7.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sparano JA. Doxorubicin/taxane combinations: cardiac toxicity and pharmacokinetics. Semin Oncol. 1999;26:14–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Norton L. Theoretical concepts and the emerging role of taxanes in adjuvant therapy. Oncologist. 2001;6:30–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Simon R, Norton L. The Norton-Simon hypothesis: designing more effective and less toxic chemotherapeutic regimens. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006;3:406–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Anampa J, Makower D. Sparano J Progress in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: an overview. BMC Med. 2015;13:195.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jones S, Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy J et al. Extended follow up and analysis by age of the US Oncology Adjuvant Trial 9735: docetaxel/cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit compared to doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and is well tolerated in women 65 or older. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007: 106(suppl 1).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jones S, Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy J, et al. Docetaxel with cyclophosphamide is associated with an overall survival benefit compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: 7-year follow up of US Oncology Research Trial 9735. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1177–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J, et al. Breast Cancer International Research Group 001 Investigators. Adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2302–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Martin M, Seguí MA, Antón A, et al. GEICAM 9805 Investigators. Adjuvant docetaxel for high-risk, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2200–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    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;24:5664–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Coudert B, Asselain B, Campone M, et al. UNICANCER Breast Group. Extended benefit from sequential administration of docetaxel after standard fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide regimen for node-positive breast cancer: the 8-year follow-up results of the UNICANCER-PACS01 trial. Oncologist. 2012;17:900–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ellis P, Barrett-Lee P, Johnson L, et al. TACT Trial Management Group; TACT Trialists. Sequential docetaxel as adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (TACT): an open-label, phase III, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;373:1681–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S, et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1663–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sparano JA, Zhao F, Martino S, et al. Long-term follow-up of the E1199 phase III trial evaluating the role of taxane and schedule in operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;20,33(21):2353–60.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 1998;351:1451–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, et al. Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes and estrogen receptor-positive tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88:1529–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, et al. 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. 2001;93:684–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, et al. Long term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-postitive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;381(9869):805–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gray R, Rea D, Handley K et al. aTTom: long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years in 6,953 women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2013 ASCO Annual Meeting Abstracts. Vol 31, No 18_suppl (June 20 Supplement), 2013:5.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cuzick J, Sestak I, Baum M, et al. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 10-year analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(12):1135–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mourisden H, Gershanovich M, Sun Y et al. Superior efficacy of letrozole versus tamoxifen as first line therapy for post menopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of a phase III study of the International Letrozole Breast Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol. 200119 (10): 2596–606.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kaufmann M, Jonat W, Hilfrich JJ, et al. Improved overall survival in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer after anastrozole initiated after treatment with tamoxifen compared with continued tamoxifen: the ARNO 95 study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(19):2664–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Coombes RC, Kilburn LS, Snowdon CF et al. Survival and safety of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2–3 years’ tamoxifen treatment (Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;369(9561):559–570.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. A randomised trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(19):1793–802.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Goss P, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al. 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. 2005;97(17):1262–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Burstein HJ, Temin S, Anderson A, et al. Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(21):2255–69.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science. 1987;235:177–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive breast cancer: planned joint analysis of overall survival from NSABP B-31 and NCCTG N9831. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(33):3744–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tan-Chiu E, Yothers G, Romond E et al. Assessment of cardiac dysfunction in a randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel, with or without trastuzumab as adjuvant therapy in node-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–overexpressing breast cancer: NSABP B-31 J Clin Oncol. 23(31):7811–9.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, et al. 2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;382(9897):1021–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pivot X, Romieu G, Debled M, et al 6 months versus 12 months of adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (PHARE): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(8):741–48.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen P-L, Bono P. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;354:809–820.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N. Phase III randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (ACT) with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel and trastuzumab (AC TH) with docetaxel, carboplatin and Trastuzumab (TCH) in HER2 positive early breast cancer patients: BCIRG 006 study. Cancer Res. 2009; 69–62.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gnant M, Mlineritsch B, Schippinger W, et al. Endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:679–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Coleman R, Cameron D, Dodwell D, et al. Adjuvant zoledronic acid in patients with early breast cancer: final efficacy analysis of the AZURE (BIG 01/04) randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(9):997–1006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment in early breast cancer: meta-analyses of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2015;386(10001):1353–61.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Beatson GT. On the treatment of inoperable cases of carcinoma of the mamma: suggestions for a new method of treatment with illustrative cases. Lancet Oncol. 1896;2:104–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Ovarian ablation in early breast cancer: overview of the randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 1996;348(9036):1189–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Cuzick J, Ambrosine L davidosn N et al. Use of luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone agonists as adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised adjuvant trials. Lancet Oncol. 2007;369(9574):1711–23.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pagani O, Regan MM, Walley BA, et al. Adjuvant exemestane with ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. N Engl Med. 2014;371:107–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node positive, oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective planned analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:55–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update recommendations for the use of tumour markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5287–312.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology Breast Cancer (version 1 2011). Accessed 15 Jan 2016.
  71. 71.
    Aebi S, Davidson T, Gruber G, Castiglione M. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow up. Ann Oncol. 21(suppl 5):v9–v14.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al. Strategies for subtypes—dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlight of the St Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(8):1736–47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJMJ, et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genom. 2006;7:278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mook S, Knauer M, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, et al. Metastatic potential of T1 breast cancer can be predicted by the 70-gene MammaPrint signature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1406–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Knauer M, Mook S, Rutgers EJ, et al. The predictive value of the 70-gene signature for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;120:655–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Drukker CA, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Retel VP, et al. A prospective evaluation of a breast cancer prognosis signature in the observational RASTER study. Int J Cancer. 2013;133:929–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Dowsett M, Sestak I, Lopez-Knowles E, et al. Comparison of PAM50 risk of recurrence score with onctotype DX and IHC4 for predicting risk of distant recurrence after endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:2783–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hormone Therapy with or without combination chemotherapy in treating women who have undergone surgery for node negative breast cancer (The TAILORx trial. Clinical Trial ID: NCTT00310180.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective Validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;2015(373):2005–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    MINDACT (Microarray in node negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph node disease may avoid chemotherapy): A prospective, randomized study to compare the 70-gene signature assay with the common clinical-pathological criteria in selecting patients for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Clinical Trial ID: NCT00433589.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gelman RS, Taylor SG. Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in women more than 65 years old with advanced breast cancer: the elimination of age trends in toxicity by using doses based on creatinine clearance. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:1404–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Christman K, Muss HB, Case LD, Stanley V. Chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer in the elderly. JAMA. 1992;268:57–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ibrahim N, Buzdar A, Frye D, Hortobagyi G. Should age be a determinant factor in treating breast cancer patients with combination chemotherapy? Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol. 1993;12:A74.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Balducci L, Phillips DM. Breast Cancer in older women. Am Fam Physician. 1998 Oct 1;58(5):1163–72.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Markopoulos C, Van de Water W. Older patients with breast cancer; is there bias in the treatment they receive? Adv Med Oncol. 2012;4(6):321–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edinburgh Cancer Centre, NHS LOTHIANEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre, Western General Hospital, University of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations