Literature DB >> 21382868

PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative, dose-dense, dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with or without darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer--outcome on prognosis.

M Untch1, G von Minckwitz2, G E Konecny3, U Conrad4, W Fett5, C Kurzeder6, H-J Lück7, E Stickeler8, H Urbaczyk9, B Liedtke10, M W Beckmann11, C Salat12, N Harbeck13, V Müller14, M Schmidt15, S Hasmüller16, M Lenhard16, V Nekljudova2, A Lebeau17, S Loibl2, P A Fasching11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the effect of dose-intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy with that of standard epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel in combination with or without darbepoetin on survival in primary breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 733 patients received either four cycles of neoadjuvant epirubicin 90 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks followed by four cycles of paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (EC→T), or three cycles of epirubicin 150 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks followed by three cycles of combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF). The patients were randomly assigned to receive darbepoetin or none. The primary objective was to demonstrate a superior disease-free survival (DFS) of E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF compared with EC→T.
RESULTS: Estimated 3-year DFS was 75.8% with EC→T versus 78.8% with E(dd)→T(dd)→CMF [hazard ratio (HR) 1.14; P = 0.37] and overall survival (OS) 88.4% versus 91.5% (HR 1.26; P = 0.237). Three-year DFS was 74.3% with darbepoetin versus 80.0% without (HR 1.31; P = 0.061) and OS 88.0% versus 91.8% (HR 1.33; P = 0.139). Patients with a pathologically documented complete response [pathological complete response (pCR)] had a significantly better DFS compared with those without achieving a pCR (estimated 3-year DFS: 89.2% versus 74.9%; HR 2.27; P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant dose-intensified chemotherapy compared with standard chemotherapy did not improve DFS, whereas the addition of darbepoetin might have detrimental effects on DFS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21382868     DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq713

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Oncol        ISSN: 0923-7534            Impact factor:   32.976


  34 in total

1.  Re-Challenging Taxanes in Recurrent Breast Cancer in Patients Treated with (Neo-)Adjuvant Taxane-Based Therapy.

Authors:  Xinrong Guo; Sibylle Loibl; Michael Untch; Volker Möbus; Kathrin Schwedler; Peter A Fasching; Jana Barinoff; Frank Holms; Christoph Thomssen; Dirk M Zahm; Rolf Kreienberg; Maik Hauschild; Holger Eidtmann; Sascha Tauchert; Keyur Mehta; Gunter von Minckwitz
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 2.  Adjuvant chemotherapy for early female breast cancer: a systematic review of the evidence for the 2014 Cancer Care Ontario systemic therapy guideline.

Authors:  S Gandhi; G G Fletcher; A Eisen; M Mates; O C Freedman; S F Dent; M E Trudeau
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Neoadjuvant Management of Early Breast Cancer: A Clinical and Investigational Position Statement.

Authors:  Ramon Colomer; Cristina Saura; Pedro Sánchez-Rovira; Tomás Pascual; Isabel T Rubio; Octavio Burgués; Lourdes Marcos; César A Rodríguez; Miguel Martín; Ana Lluch
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-02-01

Review 4.  Erythropoietin-stimulating agents and clinical outcomes in metastatic breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia: a closed debate?

Authors:  Olivia Kelada; Laure Marignol
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2014-02-20

Review 5.  Management of cancer-associated anemia with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents: ASCO/ASH clinical practice guideline update.

Authors:  Julia Bohlius; Kari Bohlke; Roberto Castelli; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Maryam B Lustberg; Massimo Martino; Giannis Mountzios; Namrata Peswani; Laura Porter; Tiffany N Tanaka; Gianluca Trifirò; Hushan Yang; Alejandro Lazo-Langner
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2019-04-23

Review 6.  Neoadjuvant Dose-Dense and Dose-Intensified Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer - Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Mattea Reinisch; Beyhan Ataseven; Sherko Kümmel
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  Neoadjuvant clinical trials for the treatment of primary breast cancer: the experience of the German study groups.

Authors:  Michael Untch; Sibylle Loibl; Gottfried E Konecny; Gunter von Minckwitz
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 5.075

8.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer with pirarubicin versus epirubicin in combination with cyclophosphamide and docetaxel.

Authors:  Xi Gu; Shi Jia; Wei Wei; Wen-Hai Zhang
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2015-02-15

9.  Trends in Anemia Management in Hemodialysis Patients with Cancer.

Authors:  Anne M Butler; Abhijit V Kshirsagar; Andrew F Olshan; Matthew E Nielsen; Stephanie B Wheeler; M Alan Brookhart
Journal:  Am J Nephrol       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 3.754

Review 10.  Prognostic impact of the combination of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents to cancer treatment: literature review.

Authors:  L Boulaamane; A Goncalves; S Boutayeb; P Viens; H M'rabti; F Bertucci; H Errihani
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.