Clinical outcome of breast cancer patients with liver metastases alone in the anthracycline-taxane era: a retrospective analysis of two prospective, randomised metastatic breast cancer trials.

Liver metastases have long been known to indicate an unfavourable disease course in breast cancer (BC). However, a small subset of patients with liver metastases alone who were treated with pre-taxane chemotherapy regimens was reported to have longer survival compared with patients with liver and metastases at other sites. In the present study, we examined the clinical outcome of breast cancer patients with liver metastases alone in the context of two phase III European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trials which compared the efficacy of doxorubicin (A) versus paclitaxel (T) (trial 10923) and of AC (cyclophosphamide) versus AT (trial 10961), given as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic BC patients. The median follow-up for the patients with liver metastases was 90.5 months in trial 10923 and 56.6 months in trial 10961. Patients with liver metastases alone comprised 18% of all patients with liver metastases, in both the 10923 and 10961 trials. The median survival of patients with liver metastases alone and liver plus other sites of metastases were 22.7 and 14.2 months (log rank test, P=0.002) in trial 10923 and 27.1 and 16.8 months (log rank test, P=0.19) in trial 10961. The median TTP (time to progression) for patients with liver metastases alone was also longer compared with the liver plus other sites of metastases group in both trials: 10.2 versus 8.8 months (log rank test, P=0.02) in trial 10923 and 8.3 versus 6.7 months (log rank test, P=0.37) in trial 10961. Most patients with liver metastases alone have progression of their disease in their liver again (96 and 60% of patients in trials 10923 and 10961, respectively). Given the high prevalence of breast cancer, improved detection of liver metastases, encouraging survival achieved with currently available cytotoxic agents and the fact that a significant portion of patients with liver metastases alone have progression of their tumour in the liver again, a more aggressive multimodality treatment approach through prospective clinical trials seems worth exploring in this specific subset of women.

Evaluation of tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival, and time to progression as potential surrogate end points in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Overall survival (OS) can be observed only after prolonged follow-up, and any potential effect of first-line therapies on OS may be confounded by the effects of subsequent therapy. We investigated whether tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival (PFS), or time to progression (TTP) could be considered a valid surrogate for OS to assess the benefits of first-line therapies for patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data were collected on 3,953 patients in 11 randomized trials that compared an anthracycline (alone or in combination) with a taxane (alone or in combination with an anthracycline). Surrogacy was assessed through the correlation between the end points as well as through the correlation between the treatment effects on the end points. RESULTS: Tumor response (survival odds ratio [OR], 6.2; 95% CI, 5.3 to 7.0) and disease control (survival OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 4.8 to 6.3) were strongly associated with OS. PFS (rank correlation coefficient, 0.688; 95% CI, 0.686 to 0.690) and TTP (rank correlation coefficient, 0.682; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.684) were moderately associated with OS. Response log ORs were strongly correlated with PFS log hazard ratios (linear coefficient [rho], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.19). Response and disease control log ORs and PFS and TTP log hazard ratios were poorly correlated with log hazard ratios for OS, but the confidence limits of rho were too wide to be informative. CONCLUSION: No end point could be demonstrated as a good surrogate for OS in these trials. Tumor response may be an acceptable surrogate for PFS.

Cellular immune responses in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1-infected children: Is immune restoration by highly active anti-retroviral therapy comparable to non-progression?

The objective of this study was to investigate whether the restored immune functions of vertically human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected children who were severely immunodeficient before the initiation of highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART) are comparable to those of untreated slow progressors. We therefore assessed T cell proliferation and cytokine [interferon (IFN)-γ, interleukin (IL)-5 and IL-13] secretions after mitogen, recall antigens and HIV-1-specific stimulation in 12 untreated slow progressors, 16 untreated progressors and 18 treated patients. Treated children were profoundly immunodeficient before the initiation of HAART and had long-lasting suppression of viral replication on treatment. We demonstrated that slow progressors are characterized not only by the preservation of HIV-1-specific lymphoproliferative responses but also by the fact that these responses are clearly T helper type 1 (Th1)-polarized. Children on HAART had proliferative responses to HIV-1 p24 antigen, purified protein derivative (PPD) and tetanus antigen similar to slow progressors and higher than those of progressors. However, in contrast to slow progressors, most treated children exhibited a release of Th2 cytokines accompanying the IFN-γ secretion in response to the HIV-1 p24 antigen. Moreover, despite higher proliferative responses to phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) than the two groups of untreated children, treated children had lower levels of IFN-γ secretion in response to PHA than slow progressors. These data show that in severely immunodeficient vertically HIV-infected children, a long-lasting HAART allows recovering lymphoproliferative responses similar to untreated slow progressors. However, alterations in IFN-γ secretion in response to the mitogen PHA persisted, and their cytokine release after HIV-specific stimulation was biased towards a Th2 response. © 2011 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Immunology © 2011 British Society for Immunology.