PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to compare quality of life (QOL) and menopausal symptoms among premenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer receivingchemotherapy, goserelin, or their sequential combination, and to investigate differential effects by age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated QOL data from 874 pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive six courses of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy, ovarian suppression with goserelin for 24 months, or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin. We report QOL data collected during 3 years after random assignment in patients without disease recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, patients receiving goserelin alone showed a marked improvement or less deterioration in QOL measures over the first 6 months than those patients treated with CMF. There were no differences at 3 years after random assignment according to treatment except for hot flashes. As reflected in the hot flashes scores, patients in all three treatment groups experienced induced amenorrhea, but the onset of ovarian function suppression was slightly delayed for patients receiving chemotherapy. Younger patients (< 40 years) who receivedgoserelin alone returned to their premenopausal status at 6 months after the cessation of therapy, while those who received CMF showed marginal changes from their baseline hot flashes scores. CONCLUSION: Age-adjusted risk profiles that consider patient-reported outcomes enable patients to adapt to their disease and treatment, such as considering the trade-offs between delayed endocrine symptoms, but higher risk of permanent menopause with chemotherapy, and immediate but reversible endocrine symptoms with goserelin, in younger premenopausal patients.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to compare quality of life (QOL) and menopausal symptoms among premenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, goserelin, or their sequential combination, and to investigate differential effects by age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated QOL data from 874 pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive six courses of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy, ovarian suppression with goserelin for 24 months, or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin. We report QOL data collected during 3 years after random assignment in patients without disease recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, patients receiving goserelin alone showed a marked improvement or less deterioration in QOL measures over the first 6 months than those patients treated with CMF. There were no differences at 3 years after random assignment according to treatment except for hot flashes. As reflected in the hot flashes scores, patients in all three treatment groups experienced induced amenorrhea, but the onset of ovarian function suppression was slightly delayed for patients receiving chemotherapy. Younger patients (< 40 years) who received goserelin alone returned to their premenopausal status at 6 months after the cessation of therapy, while those who received CMF showed marginal changes from their baseline hot flashes scores. CONCLUSION: Age-adjusted risk profiles that consider patient-reported outcomes enable patients to adapt to their disease and treatment, such as considering the trade-offs between delayed endocrine symptoms, but higher risk of permanent menopause with chemotherapy, and immediate but reversible endocrine symptoms with goserelin, in younger premenopausal patients.
Authors: Jürg Bernhard; Weixiu Luo; Karin Ribi; Marco Colleoni; Harold J Burstein; Carlo Tondini; Graziella Pinotti; Simon Spazzapan; Thomas Ruhstaller; Fabio Puglisi; Lorenzo Pavesi; Vani Parmar; Meredith M Regan; Olivia Pagani; Gini F Fleming; Prudence A Francis; Karen N Price; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Aron Goldhirsch; Barbara A Walley Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Karin Ribi; Alan Coates; Lynette Blacher; Meredith M Regan; Richard D Gelber; Jürg Bernhard Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Kathryn J Ruddy; Hao Guo; William Barry; Chau T Dang; Denise A Yardley; Beverly Moy; P Kelly Marcom; Kathy S Albain; Hope S Rugo; Matthew J Ellis; Iuliana Shapira; Antonio C Wolff; Lisa A Carey; Beth A Overmoyer; Clifford Hudis; Ian E Krop; Harold J Burstein; Eric P Winer; Ann H Partridge; Sara M Tolaney Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: P Karlsson; Z Sun; D Braun; K N Price; M Castiglione-Gertsch; M Rabaglio; R D Gelber; D Crivellari; J Collins; E Murray; K Zaman; M Colleoni; B A Gusterson; G Viale; M M Regan; A S Coates; A Goldhirsch Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: K Ribi; J Bernhard; K Rufibach; B Thürlimann; R von Moos; T Ruhstaller; A Glaus; C Böhme Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-05-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Allan Hackshaw; Michael Baum; Tommy Fornander; Bo Nordenskjold; Antonio Nicolucci; Kathryn Monson; Sharon Forsyth; Krystyna Reczko; Ulla Johansson; Helena Fohlin; Miriam Valentini; Richard Sainsbury Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 13.506