Advertisement

Adjuvante systemische Therapie

  • V. Möbus
  • T. Volm
  • R. Kreienberg
Part of the Onkologie Aktuell book series (ONKAKTUELL)

Zusammenfassung

Eine größere Anzahl von einzelnen Studien, insbesondere aber die Metaanalyse der „Early Breast Cancer Trialist’s Collaborative Group“ (EB-CTCG), haben den Nutzen einer Chemo- und Hormontherapie in der adjuvanten Behandlung des Mammakarzinomes eindrucksvoll bewiesen. Die letzte publizierte Metaanalyse datiert aus dem Jahre 1998 (Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group 1998a, b). Ihre Ergebnisse haben einen Paradigmenwechsel in der Therapie eingeleitet. Während bis dato das Alter der Patientin (Prä- vs. Postmenopause) die Hauptdiskriminante der Therapieentscheidung war (Chemo- vs. Hormontherapie), ist diese durch den Nachweis der Expression des Steroidrezeptors ersetzt worden.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Aebi S, Gelber S, Castiglione-Gertsch M et al. (2000) Is chemotherapy alone adequate for young women with est-rogenreceptor positive breast cancer? Lancet 355:1869–1874PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albain K, Green S, Ravdin P et al. (2001) Overall survival after Cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, 5-FU, and Tamoxifen (CAFT) is superior to T alone in postmenopausal, receptor (+), node (+) breast cancer: New findings from phase III Southwest Oncology Group Intergroup-Trial S8814 (INT-0100). Proc ASCO 20: abstract 94Google Scholar
  3. Anelli A, Gadelha AP, Albuquerque A A et al (1999) High response rate of paclitaxel (PTX) and Doxorubicin (DOX) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in locally advanced breast cancer (HIB) is associated with P53 status. Proc ASCO 18: abstract 302Google Scholar
  4. Benner SE, Clark GM, McGuire WL et al. (1988) Review: Steroid receptors, cellular kinetics, and lymph node status as prognostic factors in breast cancer. Am J Med Sci 196:59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergh J, Wiklund T, Erikstein B et al (2000) Tailored fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide compared with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 356:1384–1391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomoqvist C et al. (1992) The combination of radiotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin-ftorafur) and tamoxifen in stage II breast cancer. Long term follow-up results of a randomised trial. Br J Cancer 66:1171–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boccardo F et al. (1990) Chemotherapy versus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in node positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: results of a multicentric Italian study. J Clin Oncol 8:1310–1320PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 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: 2718–2727PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonadonna G (1992) Evolving concepts in the systemic adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Cancer Res 52: 2127–2137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonadonna G,Valagussa P (1981) Dose-response effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 304:10–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C et al. (1998) Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: Eight-year experience at the Milan Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol 16:93–100Google Scholar
  12. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Moliterni A et al. (1995a) Adjuvant Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, and Fluorouracil in node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 332:901–906PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonadonna G, Zambetti M, Valagussa P (1995b) Sequential or alternating doxorubicin and CMF regimens in breast cancer with more than three positive nodes. Ten-year results. JAMA 273:542–547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Budd GT, Green S, Martino S et al. (1995) Short course FAC-M vs. 1 year of CMFVP in node-positive hormone-receptor negative breast cancer: an Intergroup study. J Clin Oncol 13:831–839PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Budman DR, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT et al. (1998) Dose and dose intensity as determinants of outcome in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. JNCI 90:1205–1211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carpenter JT, Velez-Garcia E, Aron BS et al. (1994) Five-year results of a randomized comparison of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin (adriamycin) and fluorouracil (CAF) vs. cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF) for node positive breast cancer: A Southeastern Cancer Study Group Study. Proc ASCO 13: abstract 68Google Scholar
  17. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE (1989) Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 63:181–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clar GM, Mathieu M-C, Owens MA et al. (1992) Prognostic significance of s-phase fraction in good-risk, node-negative breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 10:428–432Google Scholar
  19. 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. J Clin Oncol 14:35–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooper MR (1991) The role of chemotherapy for node-negative breast cancer. Cancer 67:1744–1747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Courdi A, Hery M, Dahan E et al. (1989) Factors affecting relapse in node-negative breast cancer. A multivariate analysis including the labeling index. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 25: 352–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davidson N, O’Neill A, Vukov A et al. (1999) Effect of chemohormonal therapy in premenopausal, node (+), receptor (+) breast cancer: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Phase III Intergroup Trial (E5188, INT-0101). Proc ASCO 18: 249 (Abstract)Google Scholar
  23. Dombernowsky P et al. (1988) Adjuvant therapy of premenopausal and menopausal high-risk breast cancer patients. Acta Oncol 27: 691–697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dressier LG, Seamer LC, Owens MA et al. (1988) DNA flow cytometry and prognostic factors in 1331 frozen breast cancer specimens. Cancer 61: 420–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1996) Ovarian ablation in early breast cancer: overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 348:1189–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998a) Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 352: 930–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998b) Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 351:1451–1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Engelsman E, Klijn JGM, Rubens RD et al. (1991) „Classical“ CMF versus a 3-weekly intravenous CMF schedule in postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 27:966–970PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fisher B et al. (1986) Adjuvant chemotherapy with and without tamoxifen: five-year results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Trial. J Clin Oncol 4:459–471PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Fisher B, Anderson A, DeCillis A et al. (1999) 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 17: 3374–3388PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Fisher B, Anderson S, Wickerham DL et al. (1997a) 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 and Bowel Project B-22. J Clin Oncol 15:1858–1869PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV et al. (1990c) Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without 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 8:1483–1496Google Scholar
  33. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E et al. (1997b) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: Findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 15: 2483–2493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Fisher ER, Constantino J, Fisher B et al. (1993) Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (Protocol 4). Cancer 71:2141–2150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fisher B, Dignam J, Decillis A et al. (1997c) The worth of chemotherapy and tamoxifen (TAM) over TAM alone in nodenegative patients with estrogen-receptor (ER) positive invasive breast cancer (BC): first results from NSABP B-20. Proc ASCO: abstract 1Google Scholar
  36. Fisher B, Dignam J, Mamounas EP et al. (1996) Sequential methotrexate and fluorouracil for the treatment of node-negative breast cancer patients with estrogen receptor-negative tumors: eight-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-13 and first report of findings from NSABP B-19 comparing methotrexate and fluorouracil with conventional cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol 14:1982–1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N et al. (1997d) Tamoxifen and chemotherapy for lymph node-negative, estrogen receptorpositive breast cancer. J Nat Cancer Inst 89:1673–1682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fisher B, Redmond C, Dimitrov NV et al.(1989a) A randomized clinical trial evaluating sequential methotrexate and fluorouracil in the treatment of patients with node-negative breast cancer who have estrogen-receptor-negative tumors. N Engl J Med 320:473–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER et al. (1988) Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients. Findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. J Clin Oncol 6:1076–1087PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Fisher ER, Redmond C, Fisher B et al. (1990b) Pathological findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel projects (NSABP). Prognostic discriminants for 8-year survival for node-negative invasive breast cancer patients. Cancer [Suppl] 65: 2121–2128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fisher B, Redmond C, Legault-Poisson S et al. (1990a) Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16. J Clin Oncol 8:1005–1018PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Fisher B, Redmond C, Wickerham DL et al. (1989b) Systemic therapy in patients with node-negative breast cancer. A commentary based on two national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project (NSABP) clinical trials. Ann Int Med 111:703–712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Fisher B, Redmond C, Wickerham DL et al. (1989c) Doxorubicin containing regimens for the treatment of stage II breast cancer: The National Surgical Breast and Bowel Project Experience. J Clin Oncol 7:572–582PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Fisher B, Slack NH, Bross IdJ et al. (1969) Cancer of the breast: Size of neoplasm and prognosis. Cancer 24:1071–1080PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Forrest AP, Levack PA, Chetty U et al. (1986) A human tumour model. Lancet 2: 840–842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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: 602–611Google Scholar
  47. Galligioni E, Cetto G, Crivellari D et al. (2000) High dose epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (EC) vs cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil (CMF) in high risk premenopausal breast cancer patients:. 5-year results of a prospective randomized trial. Breast Cancer Res Tr 64: 230 (abstract)Google Scholar
  48. García-Conde J, Solá C, Solano C et al. (1996) High-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) and autologous peripheral stem-cell transplantation (APSCT) after standard chemotherapy (CT) in high-risk breast cancer patients (≥ 10 axillary node involvement after surgery). Proc ASCO 15: abstract 994Google Scholar
  49. Gianni AM, Bonadonna G (2001) Five-year results of the randomized clinical trial comparing standard versus high dose myeloablative chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with >3 positive nodes. Proc ASCO 20: 80Google Scholar
  50. Gianni AM, Siena S, Bregni M et al. (1995) 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 15: 2312–2321Google Scholar
  51. Gilewski T and Norton L (1996) Cytokinetics and breast cancer chemotherapy. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Hellmann S (Eds) Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia, New York: Lippincott-Raven: 751–768Google Scholar
  52. Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD (2000) Patient specific factors: young patients. In: NIH Consensus Development Conference on Adjuvant Therapy for Breast Cancer. Bethesda, MD: National institutes of Health: 33–37Google Scholar
  53. Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD et al. (2001) Meeting highlights: International consensus panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:3817–3827PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Senn H-J et al. (1995) Meeting highlights: International consensus panel on the treatment of primary breast cancer. JNCI 87:1441–1445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Graeff H, Jänicke F (1992) Prognosefaktoren beim Mammakarzinom und ihre Konsequenzen für die Therapieentscheidung. Chirurg 63: 461–468PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Hedley DW, Rugg CA, Gelber RD (1987) Association of DNA index and S-phase fraction with prognosis of nodes positive early breast cancer. Cancer Res 47:4729–4735PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU, Champlin R et al.(1998) Lack of efficacy of adjuvant high dose tandem combination chemotherapy for high risk primary breast cancer: a randomised trial. Proc ASCO 17: 471Google Scholar
  58. Hryniuk W, Levine MN (1986) Analysis of dose intensity for adjuvant chemotherapy trials in stage II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 4:1162–1170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Hudis C, Scidman A, Raptis G et al.(1996) Sequential adjuvant therapy: The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Experience. Semin Oncol 23 (suppl 1): 58–64PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. International Breast Cancer Study Group (1990) Late effects of adjuvant oophorectomy and chemotherapy upon pre-menopausal breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol 1:30–35Google Scholar
  61. Jacquillat C, Weil M, Baillet F et al.(1990) Results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in the breast conserving treatment of 250 patients with all stages of infiltrative breast cancer. Cancer 66:119–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Jakesz R, Hausmaninger H, Samonigg H et al.(1999) Comparison of Adjuvant Therapy with Tamoxifen and Goserelin vs. CMF in Premenopausal Stage I and II Hormone-Responsive Breast Cancer Patients: Four-Year Results of Austrian Breast Cancer Study Group (ABCSG) Trial 5. Proc ASCO 18: abstract 250Google Scholar
  63. Jänicke F (1994) Bedeutung tumorbiologischer Prognosefaktoren bei der adjuvanten Therapie des nodalnegativen Mammakarzinomes. Zentralbl Gynäkol 116: 449–455PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Jonat W, on Behalf of the ZEBRA (Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association) Trialist’s Group (2000) Zoladex™ (Goserelin) Vs. CMF as Adjuvant Therapy in Pre-/Perimeno-pausal Early (Node Positive) Breast Cancer: Preliminary Efficacy, QOL and BMD Results from the ZEBRA Study. Breast Cancer Res Tr 64: 29Google Scholar
  65. Kaufmann M Jonat W, Abel U (1989) Adjuvant Chemo- and Endocrine Therapy Alone or in Combination in Premenopausal Patients (GABG-Trial 1). Recent Res Cancer Res 115: 118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Laurence V, Extra JM, Girre V et al. (1999) Phase II study of sequential docetaxel (Taxotere®,TXT) and doxorubicin (DOX) as primary chemotherapy (CT) for large operable breast cancer (BC). Proc ASCO 18: abstract 367Google Scholar
  67. Levine MN, Bramwell VH, Pritchard K et al. (1998) Randomized Trial of Intensive Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, and Fluorouracil Chemotherapy Compared with Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, and Fluorouracil in Premenopausal Women with Node-Positive Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 16: 2651–2658PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Mansour EG, Eudey L, Shatila AH et al.(1990) Adjuvant therapy in node-negative breast cancer. Is it necessary for all patients? An intergroup study. In: Salmon SE (Ed) Adjuvant therapy of Breast Cancer. Philadelphia: Saunders: 174–189Google Scholar
  69. Mansour EG, Gray R, Shatila AH et al.(1989) Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk node-negative breast cancer. An Intergroup study. N Engl J Med 320: 485–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Marshall JS et al.(1987) Assessment of tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy in stage II breast cancer: a long-term follow-up. J Lab Clin Med 109: 300–307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Mauriac L et al.(1988) Adjuvant trial for stage II receptor positive breast cancer: CMF vs CMF + tamoxifen in a single center. Br Cancer Res Treat 16:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mauriac L, Durand M, Avril A et al. (1991) Effects of primary chemotherapy in conservative treatment of breast cancer patients with operable tumors larger than 3 cm: Results of a randomized trial in a single centre. Ann Oncol 2: 247–354Google Scholar
  73. McGuire WL, Tandon AT, Allred DC et al.(1990) Commentaries: How to use prognostic factors in axillary node-negative breast cancer patients. JNCI 82:1006–1015PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Meyer JS, Province MA (1994) S-phase fraction and nuclear size in long term prognosis of patients with breast cancer. Cancer 74: 2287–2299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. von Minckwitz G, Costa SD, Eiermann W et al.(1999) Maximized reduction of primary breast tumor size using preoperative chemotherapy with doxorubicin and docetaxel. J Clin Oncol 17:1999Google Scholar
  76. Misset J-L, diPalma M, Delgado M et al. (1996) 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 14: 1136–1145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Moliterni A, Bonadonna G, Valagussa P et al. (1991) 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 9:1124–1130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Morrison JM, Howell A, Kelly KA et al.(1989) West midlands oncology association trials of adjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: results after a median follow-up of 7 years. II patients without involved axillary lymph nodes. Br J Cancer 60:919–924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. National Cancer Institute (1988) Clinical Alert Bethesda, Maryland: National Cancer Institute May 16–18,1988Google Scholar
  80. Nemoto T, Vana J, Bedwani RN et al.(1980) Management and survival of female breast cancer: Results of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Cancer 45: 2917–2924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Norton L, Simon R (1986) The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited. Cancer Treat Rep 70:163–169PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Osborne CK (1994) Current trials and future directions of the Southwest Oncology Group Breast Cancer Committee. Cancer Supplement 74:1135–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Perloff M, Norton L, Korzun AH et al.(1996) Postsurgical adjuvant chemotherapy of stage II breast carcinoma with or without crossover to a non-cross-resistant regimen: A Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study. J Clin Oncol 14:1589–1598PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Peters WP, Rosner G, Vredenburgh J et al. (2001) Updated results of a prospective, randomized comparison of two doses of combination alkylating agents (AA) as consolidation after CAF in high-risk primary breast cancer involving ten or more axillary lymph nodes (LN): CALGB 9082/SWOG 9114/NCIC Ma-13. Proc ASCO 20: abstract 81Google Scholar
  85. Peto R (2000) EBCTCG: Worldwide Overview Results, Year 2000. 23rd Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, December 6–9 2000Google Scholar
  86. Peto R (2001) Worldwide EBCTCG Meta-Analysis of Adjuvant Systemic Therapies in Breast Cancer: Year 2000 Results. Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer. 7th International Conference, February 21–24, St. GallenGoogle Scholar
  87. Pouillart P, Fumoleau P, Romieu G et al. (1999) Final results of a phase II randomized, parallel study of Doxorubicin/Cyclophosphamide (AC) and Doxorubicin/Taxol® (paclitaxel) (AT) as neoadjuvant treatment of local-regional breast cancer. Proc ASCO 18: abstract 275Google Scholar
  88. Powles TJ, Hickish TF, Makris A et al. (1995) Randomized trial of chemoendocrine therapy started before or after surgery for treatment of primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 13: 547–552PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Pritchard Kl, Paterson AH, Fine S et al. (1997) Randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy added to tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with node-negative estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer: a report of the national Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group.J Clin Oncol 15: 2302–2311PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Quiet CA, Ferguson DJ, Weichselbaum RR et al.(1995) Natural history of node-negative breast cancer: A study of 826 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol 13:1144–1151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Riccio L, Hudis C, Scidman A et al.(1997) Long-term distant disease-free survival (DFS) from two pilot studies of dosedense sequential adjuvant chemotherapy (CRX) in women (pts) with resected breast cancer (BC) and > 3 positive lymph nodes (+LN). Proc ASCO 16: abstract 507Google Scholar
  92. Roche HH, Kerbrat P, Bonneterre J et al. (2000) Complete hormonal blockade versus chemotherapy in premenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients (pts) with positive hormone-receptor (HR+) and 1–3 node-positive (N+) tumor: Results of the FASG 06 trial. Proc ASCO 19: abstract 279Google Scholar
  93. Roche HH, Pouillart P, Meyer N et al. (2001) Adjuvant high dose chemotherapy (HDC) improves early outcome for high risk (N>7) breast cancer patients: The Pegase 01 trial. Proc ASCO 20: abstract 102Google Scholar
  94. Rodenhuis S, Bontenbal M, Beex L et al. (2000) Randomized phase III study of high-dose chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin in operable breast cancer with 4 or more axillary lymph nodes. Proc ASCO 19: abstract 286Google Scholar
  95. Rodenhuis S, Richel DJ, van der Wall et al.(1998) Randomized trial of high dose chemotherapy and hematopoetic progenitor-cell support in operable breast cancer with extensive axillary lymph node involvement. Lancet 325: 515–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Rosen PP, Groshen S, Saigo PE et al.(1989) A long-term follow-up study of survival in stage I and stage II breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 7:355–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Rosner D, Lane WW (1990) Node-negative minimal invasive breast cancer patients are not candidates for routine systemic adjuvant therapy. Cancer 66:199–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Rutqvist LE (1999) Zoladex® and Tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy in premenopausal breast cancer: A randomised trial by the Cancer Research Campaign (C.R.C.) breast cancer trials group, the Stockholm breast cancer study group, the South-East Sweden breast cancer group & the gruppo interdisciplinare valutazione interventi in oncologia (G.I.V.I.O.). Proc ASCO 18: abstract 251Google Scholar
  99. Scholl SM, Fourquet A, Asselain B et al.(1994) Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumors considered too large for breast conserving surgery: Preliminary results of a randomised trial: S6. Eur J Cancer 30 A: 645–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Senn HJ, Barrett-Mahler A-R, Jungi WF OSAKO (1989) Adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with LMF + BCG in node-negative and node-positive breast cancer patients: 10 years results. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 25: 513–525PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Silvestrini R, Daidone MG, DiFronzo G et al.(1986) Prognostic implication of labeling index versus estrogen receptors and tumor size in node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 7:161–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Silvestrini R, Daidone MG, Luisi A (1995) Biological and clinicopathologic factors as indicators of specific relapse types in node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 13: 697–704PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Smith IE, Jones AL, O’Brien ME et al. (1993) Primary medical (neo-adjuvant) chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 29 A: 1796–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Smith IE, Walsh G, Jones A et al.(1995) High complete remission rates with primary neoadjuvant infusional chemotherapy for large early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 13:424–429PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. The International Breast Cancer Study Group (1997) Effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in combination with Tamoxifen for node-positive postmenopausal breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 15:1385–1394Google Scholar
  106. The Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group (1989) Prolonged disease-free survival after one course of perioperative adjuvant chemotherapy for node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 320: 491–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Valagussa P, Bonadonna G, Veronesi U (1978) Patterns of relapse and survival following radical mastectomy. Analysis of 716 consecutive patients. Cancer 41:1170–1178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Wallwiener D, Possinger K, Bondar G et al.(2001) Leuprorelin Acetate Vs. CMF in the Adjuvant Treatment of Premenopausal Women with ER/PR-Positive, Node-Positive Breast Cancer: Interim Results of the TABLE-Study. Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 20:132 (abstract)Google Scholar
  109. Wils J, Bliss JM, Coombes RC et (1996) A multicenter randomized trial of Tamoxifen vs. Tamoxifen plus Epirubicin in postmenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. Proc ASCO 15: abstract 101Google Scholar
  110. Winchester DP (1991) Adjuvant therapy for node-negative breast cancer. Cancer 67:1741–1743PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Witzig TE, Ingle JN, Cha SS et al.(1994) DNA ploidy and the percentage of cells in S-phase as prognostics factors for women with lymph node-negative breast cancer. Cancer 74: 1752–1761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Wood C, Budman DR, Korzun AH et al.(1994) Dose and dose-intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II, node-positive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 330:1253–1259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Möbus
  • T. Volm
  • R. Kreienberg

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations