Richard G Margolese1, Reena S Cecchini2, Thomas B Julian3, Patricia A Ganz4, Joseph P Costantino2, Laura A Vallow5, Kathy S Albain6, Patrick W Whitworth7, Mary E Cianfrocca8, Adam M Brufsky9, Howard M Gross10, Gamini S Soori11, Judith O Hopkins12, Louis Fehrenbacher13, Keren Sturtz14, Timothy F Wozniak15, Thomas E Seay16, Eleftherios P Mamounas17, Norman Wolmark3. 1. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: richard.margolese@mcgill.ca. 2. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 3. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Surgical Oncology, Allegheny Cancer Center at Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 4. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA. 6. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; SWOG, San Antonio, TX, USA; Department of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 7. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; ALLIANCE/ACOSOG, Chicago, IL, USA; Nashville Breast Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 8. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; SWOG, San Antonio, TX, USA; ECOG/ACRIN, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Department of Hematology/Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ, USA. 9. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Hematology/Oncology, Magee Womens Hospital/University of Pittsburgh Department of Hematology/Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 10. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Dayton Physicians LLC, Dayton, OH, USA. 11. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Missouri Valley Cancer Consortium, Omaha, NE, USA. 12. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; SCOR NCORP, Winston Salem, NC, USA; Department of Hematology/Oncology, Forsyth Regional Cancer Center, Winston Salem, NC, USA. 13. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Medical Oncology, Kaiser Permanente Northern California Vallejo, CA, USA. 14. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Medical Oncology Colorado Cancer Research Program, Denver, CO, USA. 15. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; CCOP, Christiana Care Health Systems, Newark, DE, USA. 16. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Atlanta Regional Community Clinical Oncology Program, Atlanta, GA, USA. 17. NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP), Pittsburgh, PA, USA; UF Health Cancer Center at Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ is currently managed with excision, radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormone therapy, usually tamoxifen. We postulated that an aromatase inhibitor would be safer and more effective. We therefore undertook this trial to compare anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoinglumpectomy plus radiotherapy. METHODS: The double-blind, randomised, phase 3 National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 trial was done in 333 participating NSABP centres in the USA and Canada. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole-breast irradiation were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral tamoxifen 20 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of anastrozole) or oral anastrozole 1 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of tamoxifen) for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was breast cancer-free interval, defined as time from randomisation to any breast cancer event (local, regional, or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer, invasive disease, or ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00053898, and is complete. FINDINGS:Between Jan 1, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (1552 to tamoxifen and 1552 to anastrozole). As of Feb 28, 2015, follow-up information was available for 3083 patients for overall survival and 3077 for all other disease-free endpoints, with median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-10·0). In total, 212 breast cancer-free interval events occurred: 122 in the tamoxifen group and 90 in the anastrozole group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·56-0·96], p=0·0234). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0·0410) became evident later in the study. There was also a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0·0379), showing that anastrozole is superior only in women younger than 60 years of age. Adverse events did not differ between the groups, except for thrombosis or embolism--a known side-effect of tamoxifen-for which there were 17 grade 4 or worse events in the tamoxifen group versus four in the anastrozole group. INTERPRETATION: Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole treatment provided a significant improvement in breast cancer-free interval, mainly in women younger than 60 years of age. This finding means that women will benefit from having a choice of effective agents for ductal carcinoma in situ. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Ductal carcinoma in situ is currently managed with excision, radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormone therapy, usually tamoxifen. We postulated that an aromatase inhibitor would be safer and more effective. We therefore undertook this trial to compare anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy. METHODS: The double-blind, randomised, phase 3 National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 trial was done in 333 participating NSABP centres in the USA and Canada. Postmenopausal women with hormone-positive ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy with clear resection margins and whole-breast irradiation were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral tamoxifen 20 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of anastrozole) or oral anastrozole 1 mg per day (with matching placebo in place of tamoxifen) for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was breast cancer-free interval, defined as time from randomisation to any breast cancer event (local, regional, or distant recurrence, or contralateral breast cancer, invasive disease, or ductal carcinoma in situ), analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00053898, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2003, and June 15, 2006, 3104 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (1552 to tamoxifen and 1552 to anastrozole). As of Feb 28, 2015, follow-up information was available for 3083 patients for overall survival and 3077 for all other disease-free endpoints, with median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-10·0). In total, 212 breast cancer-free interval events occurred: 122 in the tamoxifen group and 90 in the anastrozole group (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·56-0·96], p=0·0234). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0·0410) became evident later in the study. There was also a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0·0379), showing that anastrozole is superior only in women younger than 60 years of age. Adverse events did not differ between the groups, except for thrombosis or embolism--a known side-effect of tamoxifen-for which there were 17 grade 4 or worse events in the tamoxifen group versus four in the anastrozole group. INTERPRETATION: Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole treatment provided a significant improvement in breast cancer-free interval, mainly in women younger than 60 years of age. This finding means that women will benefit from having a choice of effective agents for ductal carcinoma in situ. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP.
Authors: B Fisher; J Dignam; N Wolmark; E Mamounas; J Costantino; W Poller; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; M Deutsch; R Margolese; N Dimitrov; M Kavanah Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: V Eusebi; E Feudale; M P Foschini; A Micheli; A Conti; C Riva; S Di Palma; F Rilke Journal: Semin Diagn Pathol Date: 1994-08 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: J M Nabholtz; A Buzdar; M Pollak; W Harwin; G Burton; A Mangalik; M Steinberg; A Webster; M von Euler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Fisher; J Dignam; N Wolmark; D L Wickerham; E R Fisher; E Mamounas; R Smith; M Begovic; N V Dimitrov; R G Margolese; C G Kardinal; M T Kavanah; L Fehrenbacher; R H Oishi Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-06-12 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Irene L Wapnir; James J Dignam; Bernard Fisher; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Stewart J Anderson; Thomas B Julian; Stephanie R Land; Richard G Margolese; Sandra M Swain; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-03-11 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: B Fisher; J Costantino; C Redmond; E Fisher; R Margolese; N Dimitrov; N Wolmark; D L Wickerham; M Deutsch; L Ore Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: B Fisher; J P Costantino; D L Wickerham; C K Redmond; M Kavanah; W M Cronin; V Vogel; A Robidoux; N Dimitrov; J Atkins; M Daly; S Wieand; E Tan-Chiu; L Ford; N Wolmark Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-09-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jack Cuzick; Ivana Sestak; John F Forbes; Mitch Dowsett; Jill Knox; Simon Cawthorn; Christobel Saunders; Nicola Roche; Robert E Mansel; Gunter von Minckwitz; Bernardo Bonanni; Tiina Palva; Anthony Howell Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Patricia A Ganz; Reena S Cecchini; Thomas B Julian; Richard G Margolese; Joseph P Costantino; Laura A Vallow; Kathy S Albain; Patrick W Whitworth; Mary E Cianfrocca; Adam M Brufsky; Howard M Gross; Gamini S Soori; Judith O Hopkins; Louis Fehrenbacher; Keren Sturtz; Timothy F Wozniak; Thomas E Seay; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Norman Wolmark Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-12-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Chelsea Anderson; Anne Marie Meyer; Stephanie B Wheeler; Lei Zhou; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Hazel B Nichols Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-04-13
Authors: Jennifer Y Sheng; Cesar A Santa-Maria; Neha Mangini; Haval Norman; Rima Couzi; Raquel Nunes; Mary Wilkinson; Kala Visvanathan; Roisin M Connolly; Evanthia T Roussos Torres; John H Fetting; Deborah K Armstrong; Jessica J Tao; Lisa Jacobs; Jean L Wright; Elissa D Thorner; Christine Hodgdon; Samantha Horn; Antonio C Wolff; Vered Stearns; Karen L Smith Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2020-06-30
Authors: Rajiv P Parikh; Elizabeth B Odom; Liyang Yu; Graham A Colditz; Terence M Myckatyn Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Alexandra Thomas; Ronald J Weigel; Charles F Lynch; Philip M Spanheimer; Elizabeth K Breitbach; Mary C Schroeder Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 2.565