Marc L Citron1. 1. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA. mcitron@prohealthcare.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dose-dense chemotherapy increases the dose intensity of the regimen by delivering standard-dose chemotherapy with shorter intervals between the cycles. This article discusses the rationale for dose-dense therapy and reviews the results with dose-dense adjuvant regimens in recent clinical trials in breast cancer. METHODS: The papers for this review covered evidence of a dose-response relation in cancer chemotherapy; the rationale for dose-intense (and specifically dose-dense) therapy; and clinical experience with dose-dense regimens in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, with particular attention to outcomes and toxicity. RESULTS: Evidence supports maintaining the dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy within the conventional dose range. Disease-free and overall survival with combination cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil are significantly improved when patients receive within 85% of the planned dose. Moderate and high dose cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil within the standard range results in greater disease-free and overall survival than the low dose regimen. The sequential addition of paclitaxel after concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide also significantly improves survival. Disease-free and overall survival with dose-dense sequential or concurrent doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with filgrastim (rhG-CSF; NEUPOGEN) support are significantly greater than with conventional schedules (q21d). CONCLUSIONS: The delivered dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy within the standard dose range is an important predictor of the clinical outcome. Prospective trials of high-dose chemotherapy have shown no improvement over standard regimens, and toxicity was greater. Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy improves the clinical outcomes with doxorubicin-containing regimens. Filgrastim support enables the delivery of dose-dense chemotherapy and reduces the risk of neutropenia and its complications.
BACKGROUND: Dose-dense chemotherapy increases the dose intensity of the regimen by delivering standard-dose chemotherapy with shorter intervals between the cycles. This article discusses the rationale for dose-dense therapy and reviews the results with dose-dense adjuvant regimens in recent clinical trials in breast cancer. METHODS: The papers for this review covered evidence of a dose-response relation in cancer chemotherapy; the rationale for dose-intense (and specifically dose-dense) therapy; and clinical experience with dose-dense regimens in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, with particular attention to outcomes and toxicity. RESULTS: Evidence supports maintaining the dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy within the conventional dose range. Disease-free and overall survival with combination cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil are significantly improved when patients receive within 85% of the planned dose. Moderate and high dose cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil within the standard range results in greater disease-free and overall survival than the low dose regimen. The sequential addition of paclitaxel after concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide also significantly improves survival. Disease-free and overall survival with dose-dense sequential or concurrent doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with filgrastim (rhG-CSF; NEUPOGEN) support are significantly greater than with conventional schedules (q21d). CONCLUSIONS: The delivered dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy within the standard dose range is an important predictor of the clinical outcome. Prospective trials of high-dose chemotherapy have shown no improvement over standard regimens, and toxicity was greater. Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy improves the clinical outcomes with doxorubicin-containing regimens. Filgrastim support enables the delivery of dose-dense chemotherapy and reduces the risk of neutropenia and its complications.
Authors: Belinda Yeo; Andrew D Redfern; Kellie A Mouchemore; John A Hamilton; Robin L Anderson Journal: Clin Exp Metastasis Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 5.150
Authors: Carlo Lancia; Jakob Anninga; Cristian Spitoni; Matthew R Sydes; Jeremy Whelan; Pancras C W Hogendoorn; Hans Gelderblom; Marta Fiocco Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Carlo Lancia; Jakob K Anninga; Matthew R Sydes; Cristian Spitoni; Jeremy Whelan; Pancras C W Hogendoorn; Hans Gelderblom; Marta Fiocco Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2019-03-16 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Andrew Weaver; Sharon B Love; Mark Larsen; Milensu Shanyinde; Rachel Waters; Lisa Grainger; Vanessa Shearwood; Claire Brooks; Oliver Gibson; Annie M Young; Lionel Tarassenko Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-04-26 Impact factor: 3.603