| Literature DB >> 17505516 |
P Kerbrat1, H Roché, J Bonneterre, C Veyret, A Lortholary, A Monnier, P Fumoleau, P Fargeot, M Namer, P Chollet, M-J Goudier, B Audhuy, H Simon, P Montcuquet, J-C Eymard, S Walter, P Clavère, J-P Guastalla.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare our reference adjuvant chemotherapy, FEC100 (fluorouracil 500 mg m(-2), epirubicin 100 mg m(-2) and cyclophosphamide 500 mg m(-2), six cycles every 21 days), to an epirubicin-vinorelbine (Epi-Vnr) combination for early, poor-prognosis breast cancer patients. Patients (482) were randomised to receive FEC100, or Epi-Vnr (epirubicin 50 mg m(-2) day 1 and vinorelbine 25 mg m(-2), days 1 and 8, six cycles every 21 days). The 7-year disease-free survival rates were 59.4 and 58.8%, respectively (P=0.47). The relative dose intensity of planned epirubicin doses was 89.1% with FEC100 and 88.9% with Epi-Vnr. There were significantly more grades 3-4 neutropenia (P=0.009) with Epi-Vnr, and significantly more nausea-vomiting (P<0.0001), stomatitis (P=0.0007) and alopecia (P<0.0001) with FEC100. No cases of congestive heart failure were reported, whereas four decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction occurred after FEC100 and five after Epi-Vnr. One case of acute myeloblastic leukaemia was registered in the FEC100 arm. After 7 years of follow-up, there was no difference between treatment arms. Epi-Vnr regimen provided a good efficacy in such poor-prognosis breast cancer patients, and could be an alternative to FEC100, taking into account respective safety profiles of both regimens.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17505516 PMCID: PMC2359910 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603773
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Patient and tumour characteristics at baseline
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Median (range) | 50 (24–69) | 51 (29–66) | 0.61 |
| <40 | 35 (14.5) | 29 (12.0) | 0.42 |
| ⩾40 | 206 (85.5) | 212 (88.0) | |
|
| |||
| Premenopausal | 115 (47.7) | 117 (48.5) | 0.85 |
| Postmenopausal | 126 (52.3) | 124 (51.5) | |
|
| |||
| Tumorectomy | 144 (59.8) | 156 (64.7) | 0.34 |
| Mastectomy | 96 (39.8) | 85 (35.3) | |
| Unknown | 1 (0.4) | 0 | |
|
| |||
| Ductal | 189 (78.4) | 199 (82.6) | 0.08 |
| Lobular | 32 (13.3) | 17 (7.1) | |
| Other | 13 (5.4) | 12 (5.0) | |
| Unknown | 7 (2.9) | 13 (5.4) | |
|
| |||
| 1 | 17 (7.1) | 14 (5.8) | 0.33 |
| 2 | 92 (38.2) | 90 (37.3) | |
| 3 | 117 (48.5) | 111 (46.1) | |
| Unknown/not gradable | 15 (6.2) | 26 (10.8) | |
|
| |||
| ⩽20 | 83 (34.4) | 93 (38.6) | 0.64 |
| >20 | 132 (54.8) | 123 (51.0) | |
| Unknown | 26 (10.8) | 25 (10.4) | |
|
| |||
| 1–3 | 56 (23.2) | 63 (26.1) | 0.46 |
| >3 | 185 (76.8) | 178 (73.9) | |
|
| |||
| Positive (ER and/or PgR) | 79 (32.8) | 97 (40.2) | 0.15 |
| Negative (ER and PR) | 152 (63.1) | 131 (54.4) | |
| Unknown | 10 (4.1) | 13 (5.4) | |
Epi-Vnr=epirubicin–vinorelbine; ER=estrogen receptors; PgR=progesterone receptors; SBR=Scarff, Bloom and Richardson.
Treatment characteristics
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Treated patients ( | 236 | 233 |
| Cycles delivered ( | 1386 | 1373 |
| Six cycles completed, no. of treated patients (%) | 224 (94.9) | 224 (96.1) |
| Treatement delayed, no. of cycles (%) | 355 (25.6) | 422 (30.7) |
|
| ||
| Epirubicin | 600 (100–628) | 300 (97–379) |
| Vinorelbine | NA | 300 (51–387) |
|
| ||
| Epirubicin | 89.1 (11.8) | 88.9 (10.2) |
| Vinorelbine | NA | 87.8 (11.2) |
| Epirubicin | 29.9 (3.9) | 15.1 (1.5) |
| Vinorelbine | NA | 14.9 (1.7) |
Epi-Vnr=epirubicin–vinorelbine; NA=not applicable; s.d.=standard deviation.
Summary of events in patients entered in the efficacy analysis
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| 105 (44.7) | 110 (46.6) |
| Relapse | 87 (37.0) | 95 (40.2) |
| Local only | 13 (5.5) | 17 (7.2) |
| Distant (with or without local) | 74 (31.5) | 78 (33.0) |
| Contralateral breast cancer | 10 (4.2) | 5 (2.1) |
| Second cancer | 5 (2.1) | 5 (2.1) |
| Death | 3 (1.3) | 5 (2.1) |
|
| ||
| Relapse | 89 (37.9) | 96 (40.7) |
| Local only | 10 (4.2) | 9 (3.8) |
| Local then distant | 4 (1.7) | 8 (3.4) |
| Local and distant simultaneously | 5 (2.1) | 8 (3.4) |
| Distant only | 70 (29.8) | 71 (30.1) |
| Contralateral breast cancer | 10 (4.2) | 10 (4.2) |
| Second cancer | 8 (3.4) | 5 (2.1) |
| Any death | 62 (26.4) | 71 (30.1) |
| Of breast cancer | 54 (23.0) | 63 (26.7) |
| Of second cancer | 3 (1.3) | 0 |
| Due to toxic effects | 1 (0.4) | 0 |
| Due to cardiac events | 2 (0.8) | 1 (0.4) |
| Other causes | 2 (0.8) | 7 (3.0) |
Epi-Vnr=epirubicin–vinorelbine.
Necrotic enteritis (n=1), unknown (n=1).
Cirrhosis (n=1), unknown (n=6).
Prognostic factors of relapse
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| FEC100 | 0.90 (0.61–1.19) | 0.47 | 0.91 (0.58–1.24) | 0.57 |
| Epi-Vnr | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| No | 1.52 (1.21–1.83) | 0.009 | 1.34 (0.82–1.86) | 0.26 |
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| <40 | 1.58 (1.20–1.96) | 0.01 | 1.41 (0.91–1.91) | 0.17 |
| ⩾40 | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| Premenopausal | 1.48 (1.19–1.77) | 0.008 | 1.15 (0.63–1.67) | 0.59 |
| Postmenopausal | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| Tumorectomy | 0.76 (0.47–1.05) | 0.06 | 0.68 (0.32–1.04) | 0.04 |
| Mastectomy | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 0.07 | 0.21 | ||
| 1 | 0.55 (0.00–1.23) | 0.56 (0.00–1.31) | ||
| 2 | 0.75 (0.43–1.07) | 0.79 (0.42–1.16) | ||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| ⩽20 | 0.66 (0.34–0.98) | 0.01 | 0.68 (0.31–1.05) | 0.04 |
| >20 | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| 1–3 | 0.65 (0.29–0.99) | 0.02 | 0.84 (0.29–1.39) | 0.52 |
| >3 | 1 | 1 | ||
|
| ||||
| Negative | 0.89 (0.58–1.20) | 0.45 | 0.92 (0.47–1.37) | 0.73 |
| Positive | 1 | 1 | ||
95% CI=95% confidence interval; Epi-Vnr=epirubicin–vinorelbine; HR=hazard ratio; HR=hormone receptors; SBR=Scarff, Bloom and Richardson.
Figure 1Disease-free survival curves.
Figure 2Overall survival curves.
Haematologic and non-haematologic adverse events per treated patient
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 105 (44.5) | 118 (50.6) | 0.009 |
| Grades 3–4 | 41 (17.4) | 56 (24.0) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 71 (30.1) | 67 (28.8) | 0.95 |
| Grades 3–4 | 5 (2.1) | 5 (2.1) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 95 (40.2) | 93 (39.9) | 0.60 |
| Grade 3 | 3 (1.3) | 1 (0.4) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 150 (63.6) | 151 (64.8) | <0.0001 |
| Grades 3–4 | 58 (24.6) | 27 (11.6) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 85 (36.0) | 49 (21.0) | 0.0007 |
| Grades 3 | 7 (3.0) | 4 (1.7) | |
|
| |||
| Grade 1–2 | 30 (12.7) | 24 (10.3) | 0.27 |
| Grade 3 | 0 (0.0) | 2 (0.9) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 49 (20.8) | 113 (48.5) | <0.0001 |
| Grade 3 | 160 (67.8) | 64 (27.5) | |
|
| |||
| Grades 1–2 | 47 (19.9) | 38 (16.3) | 0.14 |
| Grade 3 | 5 (2.1) | 1 (0.4) | |
Epi-Vnr=epirubicin–vinorelbine.
One patient died from a septic shock.