BACKGROUND: Differences in the efficacy of various chemotherapies in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)(+) metastatic breast cancer are not well understood. In the present study, we assessed the efficacy of docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer according to ER expression. METHODS: The efficacy of docetaxel in terms of the response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) time was analyzed according to ER expression in four randomized trials comparing a docetaxel-based regimen with a nontaxane regimen that included a total of 1,631 patients. The odds ratio for tumor response was estimated with logistic regression and a hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was estimated with Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS:ER expression was assessable in 1,037 patients included in these trials (64%). ER was expressed in 601 tumors (58%). Docetaxel was associated with a similarly higher response rate in both patients with ER(+) (odds ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.72-4.87) and patients with ER(-) (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.44-4.51) disease. The lower hazard for disease progression with docetaxel was also similar in ER(+) (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00) and ER(-) (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.07) cancers. The effect of docetaxel was not different in ER(+) and ER(-) disease, in terms of both the response rate and PFS time (interaction test, p = .77 and p = .93). INTERPRETATION:Docetaxel produces a higher response rate and lower risk for disease progression to a statistically similar extent in both patients with ER(+) and patients with ER(-) metastatic breast cancer.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Differences in the efficacy of various chemotherapies in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)(+) metastatic breast cancer are not well understood. In the present study, we assessed the efficacy of docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer according to ER expression. METHODS: The efficacy of docetaxel in terms of the response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) time was analyzed according to ER expression in four randomized trials comparing a docetaxel-based regimen with a nontaxane regimen that included a total of 1,631 patients. The odds ratio for tumor response was estimated with logistic regression and a hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was estimated with Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS:ER expression was assessable in 1,037 patients included in these trials (64%). ER was expressed in 601 tumors (58%). Docetaxel was associated with a similarly higher response rate in both patients with ER(+) (odds ratio, 2.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.72-4.87) and patients with ER(-) (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.44-4.51) disease. The lower hazard for disease progression with docetaxel was also similar in ER(+) (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00) and ER(-) (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.07) cancers. The effect of docetaxel was not different in ER(+) and ER(-) disease, in terms of both the response rate and PFS time (interaction test, p = .77 and p = .93). INTERPRETATION:Docetaxel produces a higher response rate and lower risk for disease progression to a statistically similar extent in both patients with ER(+) and patients with ER(-) metastatic breast cancer.
Authors: J Alexandre; P Bleuzen; J Bonneterre; W Sutherland; J L Misset; J Guastalla; P Viens; S Faivre; A Chahine; M Spielman; A Bensmaïne; M Marty; M Mahjoubi; E Cvitkovic Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Roman Rouzier; Charles M Perou; W Fraser Symmans; Nuhad Ibrahim; Massimo Cristofanilli; Keith Anderson; Kenneth R Hess; James Stec; Mark Ayers; Peter Wagner; Paolo Morandi; Chang Fan; Islam Rabiul; Jeffrey S Ross; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-08-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J Bonneterre; A Buzdar; J M Nabholtz; J F Robertson; B Thürlimann; M von Euler; T Sahmoud; A Webster; M Steinberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Catherine Van Poznak; Lee Tan; Katherine S Panageas; Crispinita D Arroyo; Clifford Hudis; Larry Norton; Andrew D Seidman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S Chan; K Friedrichs; D Noel; T Pintér; S Van Belle; D Vorobiof; R Duarte; M Gil Gil; I Bodrogi; E Murray; L Yelle; G von Minckwitz; S Korec; P Simmonds; F Buzzi; R González Mancha; G Richardson; E Walpole; M Ronzoni; M Murawsky; M Alakl; A Riva; J Crown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Bonneterre; B Thürlimann; J F Robertson; M Krzakowski; L Mauriac; P Koralewski; I Vergote; A Webster; M Steinberg; M von Euler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Judith Hugh; John Hanson; Maggie Chon U Cheang; Torsten O Nielsen; Charles M Perou; Charles Dumontet; John Reed; Maryla Krajewska; Isabelle Treilleux; Matthieu Rupin; Emmanuelle Magherini; John Mackey; Miguel Martin; Charles Vogel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-02-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Siao-Nge Hoon; Peter Kh Lau; Alison M White; Max K Bulsara; Patricia D Banks; Andrew D Redfern Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-05-26