OBJECTIVE: To compare the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of patients treated with5-fluorouracil (5-FU), doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) versus dose-intense FAC plus G-CSF in the neoadjuvant setting and to compare the delivered dose intensity, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) times, and toxicity between treatment arms in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive preoperative FAC (5-FU, 500 mg/m(2); doxorubicin, 50 mg/m(2); cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m(2)) every 21 days for four cycles or dose-intense FAC (5-FU, 600 mg/m(2); doxorubicin, 60 mg/m(2); cyclophosphamide, 1,000 mg/m(2)) plus G-CSF every 18 days for four cycles. RESULTS:Two hundred two patients were randomly assigned. The median follow-up was 7.5 years. Patients randomized to FAC plus G-CSF had a higher pCR rate as well as clinical complete response rate; however, these differences were not statistically different from those with the FAC arm. Patients in the FAC + G-CSF arm had a higher delivered dose intensity of doxorubicin in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings than those in the standard FAC arm. DFS and OS times were not significantly different between the two groups. However, the OS and DFS rates were significantly higher for patients who achieved a pCR than for those who did not. Thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia, and infection rates were higher in the FAC + G-CSF arm. CONCLUSIONS: A higher delivered dose intensity of doxorubicin with the FAC + G-CSF regimen did not result in a statistically significant higher pCR rate. However, patients who achieved a pCR experienced longer DFS and OS times.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of patients treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FAC) versus dose-intense FAC plus G-CSF in the neoadjuvant setting and to compare the delivered dose intensity, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) times, and toxicity between treatment arms in patients with breast cancer. METHODS:Patients were randomized to receive preoperative FAC (5-FU, 500 mg/m(2); doxorubicin, 50 mg/m(2); cyclophosphamide, 500 mg/m(2)) every 21 days for four cycles or dose-intense FAC (5-FU, 600 mg/m(2); doxorubicin, 60 mg/m(2); cyclophosphamide, 1,000 mg/m(2)) plus G-CSF every 18 days for four cycles. RESULTS: Two hundred two patients were randomly assigned. The median follow-up was 7.5 years. Patients randomized to FAC plus G-CSF had a higher pCR rate as well as clinical complete response rate; however, these differences were not statistically different from those with the FAC arm. Patients in the FAC + G-CSF arm had a higher delivered dose intensity of doxorubicin in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings than those in the standard FAC arm. DFS and OS times were not significantly different between the two groups. However, the OS and DFS rates were significantly higher for patients who achieved a pCR than for those who did not. Thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia, and infection rates were higher in the FAC + G-CSF arm. CONCLUSIONS: A higher delivered dose intensity of doxorubicin with the FAC + G-CSF regimen did not result in a statistically significant higher pCR rate. However, patients who achieved a pCR experienced longer DFS and OS times.
Authors: M N Fornier; A D Seidman; M Theodoulou; M E Moynahan; V Currie; M Moasser; N Sklarin; T Gilewski; G D'Andrea; R Salvaggio; K S Panageas; L Norton; C Hudis Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: M J Piccart; A Di Leo; M Beauduin; A Vindevoghel; J Michel; C Focan; A Tagnon; F Ries; P Gobert; C Finet; M T Closon-Dejardin; J P Dufrane; J Kerger; F Liebens; S Beauvois; S Bartholomeus; S Dolci; J P Lobelle; M Paesmans; J M Nogaret Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-06-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Bergh; T Wiklund; B Erikstein; E Lidbrink; H Lindman; P Malmström; P Kellokumpu-Lehtinen; N O Bengtsson; G Söderlund; G Anker; E Wist; S Ottosson; E Salminen; P Ljungman; H Holte; J Nilsson; C Blomqvist; N Wilking Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-10-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: B Fisher; S Anderson; A DeCillis; N Dimitrov; J N Atkins; L Fehrenbacher; P H Henry; E H Romond; K S Lanier; E Davila; C G Kardinal; L Laufman; H I Pierce; N Abramson; A M Keller; J T Hamm; D L Wickerham; M Begovic; E Tan-Chiu; W Tian; N Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J A Wils; J M Bliss; M Marty; G Coombes; C Fontaine; F Morvan; T Olmos; F R Pérez-López; P Vassilopoulos; E Woods; R C Coombes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marc L Citron; Donald A Berry; Constance Cirrincione; Clifford Hudis; Eric P Winer; William J Gradishar; Nancy E Davidson; Silvana Martino; Robert Livingston; James N Ingle; Edith A Perez; John Carpenter; David Hurd; James F Holland; Barbara L Smith; Carolyn I Sartor; Eleanor H Leung; Jeffrey Abrams; Richard L Schilsky; Hyman B Muss; Larry Norton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-02-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: P Therasse; L Mauriac; M Welnicka-Jaskiewicz; P Bruning; T Cufer; H Bonnefoi; E Tomiak; K I Pritchard; A Hamilton; M J Piccart Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: I Craig Henderson; Donald A Berry; George D Demetri; Constance T Cirrincione; Lori J Goldstein; Silvana Martino; James N Ingle; M Robert Cooper; Daniel F Hayes; Katherine H Tkaczuk; Gini Fleming; James F Holland; David B Duggan; John T Carpenter; Emil Frei; Richard L Schilsky; William C Wood; Hyman B Muss; Larry Norton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C E Simmons; S Hogeveen; R Leonard; Y Rajmohan; D Han; A Wong; J Lee; M Brackstone; J F Boileau; R Dinniwell; S Gandhi Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Larissa A Korde; Mark R Somerfield; Lisa A Carey; Jennie R Crews; Neelima Denduluri; E Shelley Hwang; Seema A Khan; Sibylle Loibl; Elizabeth A Morris; Alejandra Perez; Meredith M Regan; Patricia A Spears; Preeti K Sudheendra; W Fraser Symmans; Rachel L Yung; Brittany E Harvey; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Victor Manuel Ruiz-Rodríguez; Eneida Turiján-Espinoza; Jaime Arturo Guel-Pañola; Mariana Haydee García-Hernández; José de Jesús Zermeño-Nava; Nallely López-López; Sofia Bernal-Silva; Esther Layseca-Espinosa; Ezequiel M Fuentes-Pananá; Ana María Estrada-Sánchez; Diana Patricia Portales-Pérez Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Jude M Mulligan; Laura A Hill; Steve Deharo; Gareth Irwin; David Boyle; Katherine E Keating; Olaide Y Raji; Fionnuala A McDyer; Eamonn O'Brien; Max Bylesjo; Jennifer E Quinn; Noralane M Lindor; Paul B Mullan; Colin R James; Steven M Walker; Peter Kerr; Jacqueline James; Timothy S Davison; Vitali Proutski; Manuel Salto-Tellez; Patrick G Johnston; Fergus J Couch; D Paul Harkin; Richard D Kennedy Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 13.506