BACKGROUND: For patients with axillary lymph node-negative breast cancer, benefits from adjuvant therapy are smaller than in node-positive disease and thus more selective use is warranted, prompting development of risk profiling to identify those most likely to benefit. Examination of the magnitude and changes in the hazard of failure over time in node-negative breast cancer may also be informative in this regard. METHODS: Among 9,444 participants from five randomized trials (accrual 1982-1998) investigating chemotherapy and tamoxifen for node-negative breast cancer, we estimated recurrence hazards over time by tumor estrogen receptor (ER) status and adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: In patients treated by surgery only, we observed the previously noted larger hazard peak followed by a rapid decrease in ER-negative patients and smaller but more persistent hazard in ER-positive patients. After approximately 48 months, the ER-positive hazard is greater. For adjuvant treatment, while tamoxifen decreases the early hazard in ER-positive patients to that of the chemotherapy-treated ER-negative group, in later follow-up (beyond 5 years) the hazard for ER-positive patients again exceeds that of ER-negative patients. Adding chemotherapy to tamoxifen in ER-positive patients results in large early hazard reduction, but in later follow-up the hazard converges with those of patients treated by surgery only or tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence hazards over time reveal changes in risk that may have biologic and therapeutic strategy relevance. In ER-negative tumors, a large early chemotherapy benefit is followed by a consistently low recurrence hazard over time. In ER-positive patients, the chemotherapy benefit appears concentrated mostly in earlier follow-up, and a greater recurrence risk remains.
BACKGROUND: For patients with axillary lymph node-negative breast cancer, benefits from adjuvant therapy are smaller than in node-positive disease and thus more selective use is warranted, prompting development of risk profiling to identify those most likely to benefit. Examination of the magnitude and changes in the hazard of failure over time in node-negative breast cancer may also be informative in this regard. METHODS: Among 9,444 participants from five randomized trials (accrual 1982-1998) investigating chemotherapy and tamoxifen for node-negative breast cancer, we estimated recurrence hazards over time by tumorestrogen receptor (ER) status and adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: In patients treated by surgery only, we observed the previously noted larger hazard peak followed by a rapid decrease in ER-negative patients and smaller but more persistent hazard in ER-positive patients. After approximately 48 months, the ER-positive hazard is greater. For adjuvant treatment, while tamoxifen decreases the early hazard in ER-positive patients to that of the chemotherapy-treated ER-negative group, in later follow-up (beyond 5 years) the hazard for ER-positive patients again exceeds that of ER-negative patients. Adding chemotherapy to tamoxifen in ER-positive patients results in large early hazard reduction, but in later follow-up the hazard converges with those of patients treated by surgery only or tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence hazards over time reveal changes in risk that may have biologic and therapeutic strategy relevance. In ER-negative tumors, a large early chemotherapy benefit is followed by a consistently low recurrence hazard over time. In ER-positive patients, the chemotherapy benefit appears concentrated mostly in earlier follow-up, and a greater recurrence risk remains.
Authors: Donald A Berry; Constance Cirrincione; I Craig Henderson; Marc L Citron; Daniel R Budman; Lori J Goldstein; Silvana Martino; Edith A Perez; Hyman B Muss; Larry Norton; Clifford Hudis; Eric P Winer Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nazmus Saquib; John P Pierce; Juliann Saquib; Shirley W Flatt; Loki Natarajan; Wayne A Bardwell; Ruth E Patterson; Marcia L Stefanick; Cynthia A Thomson; Cheryl L Rock; Lovell A Jones; Ellen B Gold; Njeri Karanja; Barbara A Parker Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Yolanda Hagar; David Albers; Rimma Pivovarov; Herbert Chase; Vanja Dukic; Noémie Elhadad Journal: Stat Anal Data Min Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 1.051
Authors: Ismail Jatoi; Hanna Bandos; Jong-Hyeon Jeong; William F Anderson; Edward H Romond; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: A García Fernández; C Chabrera; M García Font; M Fraile; J M Lain; S Gónzalez; I Barco; C González; J Torres; M Piqueras; L Cirera; E Veloso; A Pessarrodona; N Giménez Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Loki Natarajan; Minya Pu; Barbara A Parker; Cynthia A Thomson; Bette J Caan; Shirley W Flatt; Lisa Madlensky; Richard A Hajek; Wael K Al-Delaimy; Nazmus Saquib; Ellen B Gold; John P Pierce Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-04-29 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Antonio García Fernández; Carol Chabrera; Marc García Font; Manel Fraile; Sonia Gónzalez; Israel Barco; Clarisa González; Lluís Cirera; Enrique Veloso; José María Lain; Antoni Pessarrodona; Nuria Giménez Journal: Tumour Biol Date: 2013-04-19
Authors: Jaclyn L F Bosco; Timothy L Lash; Marianne N Prout; Diana S M Buist; Ann M Geiger; Reina Haque; Feifei Wei; Rebecca A Silliman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-10-20 Impact factor: 4.254