Bone fractures among postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer treated with 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen in the BIG 1-98 trial.

To compare the incidence and timing of bone fractures in postmenopausal women treated with 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen or letrozole for endocrine-responsive early breast cancer in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial.

Regarding “Co-expression of SNAIL and TWIST determines prognosis in estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer patients”

We read the interesting research article published by van Nes et al. [1], which described the use of Snail and TWIST together in the prognosis of breast cancer, and in particular in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer patients.

Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials

Background Moderate di?erences in e?cacy between adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for breast cancer are plausible, and could a? ect treatment choices. We sought any such di?erences.

Methods We undertook individual-patient-data meta-analyses of the randomised trials comparing: any taxane-plusanthracycline-based regimen versus the same, or more, non-taxane chemotherapy (n=44 000); one anthracyclinebased regimen versus another (n=7000) or versus cyclo phosphamide, methotrexate, and ?uorouracil (CMF; n=18 000); and polychemotherapy versus no chemotherapy (n=32 000). The scheduled dosages of these three drugs and of the anthracyclines doxorubicin (A) and epirubicin (E) were used to de? ne standard CMF, standard 4AC, and CAF and CEF. Log-rank breast cancer mortality rate ratios (RRs) are reported.

Findings In trials adding four separate cycles of a taxane to a ?xed anthracycline-based control regimen, extending treatment duration, breast cancer mortality was reduced (RR 0·86, SE 0·04, two-sided signi?cance [2p]=0·0005). In trials with four such extra cycles of a taxane counterbalanced in controls by extra cycles of other cytotoxic drugs, roughly doubling non-taxane dosage, there was no signi?cant di?erence (RR 0·94, SE 0·06, 2p=0·33). Trials with CMF-treated controls showed that standard 4AC and standard CMF were equivalent (RR 0·98, SE 0·05, 2p=0·67), but that anthracycline-based regimens with substantially higher cumulative dosage than standard 4AC (eg, CAF or CEF) were superior to standard CMF (RR 0·78, SE 0·06, 2p=0·0004). Trials versus no chemotherapy also suggested greater mortality reductions with CAF (RR 0·64, SE 0·09, 2p<0·0001) than with standard 4AC (RR 0·78, SE 0·09, 2p=0·01) or
standard CMF (RR 0·76, SE 0·05, 2p<0·0001). In all meta-analyses involving taxane-based or anthracycline-based regimens, proportional risk reductions were little a? ected by age, nodal status, tumour diameter or di?erentiation (moderate or poor; few were well di?erentiated), oestrogen receptor status, or tamoxifen use. Hence, largely independently of age (up to at least 70 years) or the tumour characteristics currently available to us for the patients selected to be in these trials, some taxane-plus-anthracycline-based or higher-cumulative-dosage anthracycline-based regimens (not requiring stem cells) reduced breast cancer mortality by, on average, about one-third. 10-year overall mortality di?erences paralleled breast cancer mortality di?erences, despite taxane, anthracycline, and other toxicities.

Interpretation 10-year gains from a one-third breast cancer mortality reduction depend on absolute risks without chemotherapy (which, for oestrogen-receptor-positive disease, are the risks remaining with appropriate endocrine therapy). Low absolute risk implies low absolute bene?t, but information was lacking about tumour gene expression markers or quantitative immunohistochemistry that might help to predict risk, chemosensitivity, or both.

Model selection for prognostic time-to-event gene signature discovery with applications in early breast cancer data

Model selection between competing models is a key consideration in the discovery of prognostic multigene signatures. The use of appropriate statistical performance measures as well as verification of biological significance of the signatures is imperative to maximise the chance of external validation of the generated signatures. Current approaches in time-to-event studies often use only a single measure of performance in model selection, such as logrank test p-values, or dichotomise the follow-up times at some phase of the study to facilitate signature discovery. In this study we improve the prognostic signature discovery process through the application of the multivariate partial Cox model combined with the concordance index, hazard ratio of predictions, independence from available clinical covariates and biological enrichment as measures of signature performance. The proposed framework was applied to discover prognostic multigene signatures from early breast cancer data. The partial Cox model combined with the multiple performance measures were used in both guiding the selection of the optimal panel of prognostic genes and prediction of risk within cross validation without dichotomising the follow-up times at any stage. The signatures were successfully externally cross validated in independent breast cancer datasets, yielding a hazard ratio of 2.55 [1.44, 4.51] for the top ranking signature.

Adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment in early breast cancer: meta-analyses of individual patient data from randomised trials

BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonates have profound effects on bone physiology, and could modify the process of metastasis. We undertook collaborative meta-analyses to clarify the risks and benefits of adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment in breast cancer.

METHODS: We sought individual patient data from all unconfounded trials in early breast cancer that randomised between bisphosphonate and control. Primary outcomes were recurrence, distant recurrence, and breast cancer mortality. Primary subgroup investigations were site of first distant recurrence (bone or other), menopausal status (postmenopausal [combining natural and artificial] or not), and bisphosphonate class (aminobisphosphonate [eg, zoledronic acid, ibandronate, pamidronate] or other [ie, clodronate]). Intention-to-treat log-rank methods yielded bisphosphonate versus control first-event rate ratios (RRs).

FINDINGS: We received data on 18 766 women (18 206 [97%] in trials of 2-5 years of bisphosphonate) with median follow-up 5·6 woman-years, 3453 first recurrences, and 2106 subsequent deaths. Overall, the reductions in recurrence (RR 0·94, 95% CI 0·87-1·01; 2p=0·08), distant recurrence (0·92, 0·85-0·99; 2p=0·03), and breast cancer mortality (0·91, 0·83-0·99; 2p=0·04) were of only borderline significance, but the reduction in bone recurrence was more definite (0·83, 0·73-0·94; 2p=0·004). Among premenopausal women, treatment had no apparent effect on any outcome, but among 11 767 postmenopausal women it produced highly significant reductions in recurrence (RR 0·86, 95% CI 0·78-0·94; 2p=0·002), distant recurrence (0·82, 0·74-0·92; 2p=0·0003), bone recurrence (0·72, 0·60-0·86; 2p=0·0002), and breast cancer mortality (0·82, 0·73-0·93; 2p=0·002). Even for bone recurrence, however, the heterogeneity of benefit was barely significant by menopausal status (2p=0·06 for trend with menopausal status) or age (2p=0·03), and it was non-significant by bisphosphonate class, treatment schedule, oestrogen receptor status, nodes, tumour grade, or concomitant chemotherapy. No differences were seen in non-breast cancer mortality. Bone fractures were reduced (RR 0·85, 95% CI 0·75-0·97; 2p=0·02).

INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant bisphosphonates reduce the rate of breast cancer recurrence in the bone and improve breast cancer survival, but there is definite benefit only in women who were postmenopausal when treatment began.

FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council.

Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient-level meta-analysis of the randomised trials

BACKGROUND: The optimal ways of using aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen as endocrine treatment for early breast cancer remains uncertain.

METHODS: We undertook meta-analyses of individual data on 31 920 postmenopausal women with oestrogen-receptor-positive early breast cancer in the randomised trials of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen; of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5; and of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen. Primary outcomes were any recurrence of breast cancer, breast cancer mortality, death without recurrence, and all-cause mortality. Intention-to-treat log-rank analyses, stratified by age, nodal status, and trial, yielded aromatase inhibitor versus tamoxifen first-event rate ratios (RRs).

FINDINGS: In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·64, 95% CI 0·52-0·78) and 2-4 (RR 0·80, 0·68-0·93), and non-significantly thereafter. 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (12·1% vs 14·2%; RR 0·85, 0·75-0·96; 2p=0·009). In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·74, 0·62-0·89) but not while both groups received aromatase inhibitors during years 2-4, or thereafter; overall in these trials, there were fewer recurrences with 5 years of aromatase inhibitors than with tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitors (RR 0·90, 0·81-0·99; 2p=0·045), though the breast cancer mortality reduction was not significant (RR 0·89, 0·78-1·03; 2p=0·11). In the comparison of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 2-4 (RR 0·56, 0·46-0·67) but not subsequently, and 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with switching to aromatase inhibitors than with remaining on tamoxifen (8·7% vs 10·1%; 2p=0·015). Aggregating all three types of comparison, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors during periods when treatments differed (RR 0·70, 0·64-0·77), but not significantly thereafter (RR 0·93, 0·86-1·01; 2p=0·08). Breast cancer mortality was reduced both while treatments differed (RR 0·79, 0·67-0·92), and subsequently (RR 0·89, 0·81-0·99), and for all periods combined (RR 0·86, 0·80-0·94; 2p=0·0005). All-cause mortality was also reduced (RR 0·88, 0·82-0·94; 2p=0·0003). RRs differed little by age, body-mass index, stage, grade, progesterone receptor status, or HER2 status. There were fewer endometrial cancers with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (10-year incidence 0·4% vs 1·2%; RR 0·33, 0·21-0·51) but more bone fractures (5-year risk 8·2% vs 5·5%; RR 1·42, 1·28-1·57); non-breast-cancer mortality was similar.

INTERPRETATION: Aromatase inhibitors reduce recurrence rates by about 30% (proportionately) compared with tamoxifen while treatments differ, but not thereafter. 5 years of an aromatase inhibitor reduces 10-year breast cancer mortality rates by about 15% compared with 5 years of tamoxifen, hence by about 40% (proportionately) compared with no endocrine treatment.

FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council.

Adjuvant early breast cancer systemic therapies according to daily used technologies.

Prognosis of early breast cancer patients is significantly improved with the use of adjuvant therapies. Various guidelines have been proposed to select patients who will derive the most benefit from such treatments. However, classifications have limited usefulness in subsets of patients such as those with node negative breast cancer. The 2007 St. Paul de Vence Clinical Practice Recommendations proposed to consider adjuvant therapy in accordance with the 10-year relapse-free survival reduction estimated by Adjuvant! Online. However, many limitations remain regarding the use of Adjuvant! Online. Among them, adverse prognostic and/or predictive factors such as vascular invasion, mitotic activity, progesterone receptor negativity, and HER-2 expression are not incorporated in the routine clinical decision process. Our group has therefore issued guidelines based on the consideration of both Adjuvant! Online calculations and the prognostic and/or predictive effects of these markers. In addition, web-accessible comprehensive tables summarizing these recommendations are provided.

Interpreting Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer

The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a four-arm trial comparing 5 years of monotherapy with tamoxifen or with letrozole or with sequences of 2 years of one followed by 3 years of the other for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early invasive breast cancer. From 1998 to 2003, BIG -98 enrolled 8,010 women. The enhanced design f the trial enabled two complementary analyses of efficacy and safety. Collection of tumor specimens further enabled treatment comparisons based on tumor biology. Reports of BIG 1-98 should be interpreted in relation to each individual patient as she weighs the costs and benefits of available treatments.

Ocular toxicity during adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for early breast cancer: results from International Breast Cancer Study Group trials

BACKGROUND: Others have reported ocular toxicity after adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy, but this study looked at ocular toxicity in similarly treated patients from large randomized clinical trials. METHODS: Information was retrieved on incidence and timing of ocular toxicity from the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) database of 4948 eligible patients randomized to receive tamoxifen or toremifene alone or in combination with chemotherapy (either concurrently or sequentially). Case reports of patients with ocular toxicity were evaluated to determine whether ocular toxicity occurred during chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. Additional information was obtained from participating institutions for patients in whom ocular toxicity occurred after chemotherapy but during administration of tamoxifen or toremifene. RESULTS: Ocular toxicity was reported in 538 of 4948 (10.9%) patients during adjuvant treatment, mainly during chemotherapy. Forty-five of 4948 (0.9%) patients had ocular toxicity during hormone therapy alone, but only 30 (0.6%) patients had ocular toxicity reported either without receiving any chemotherapy or beyond 3 months after completing chemotherapy and, thus, possibly related to tamoxifen or toremifene. In 3 cases, retinal alterations, without typical aspects of tamoxifen toxicity, were reported; 4 patients had cataract (2 bilateral), 12 impaired visual acuity, 10 ocular irritation, 1 optical neuritis, and the rest had other symptoms. CONCLUSION: Ocular toxicity during adjuvant therapy is a common side effect mainly represented by irritative symptoms due to chemotherapy. By contrast, ocular toxicity during hormonal therapy is rare and does not appear to justify a regular program of ocular examination. However, patients should be informed of this rare side effect so that they may seek prompt ophthalmic evaluation for ocular complaints.

Treatment of premenopausal women with early breast cancer: old challenges and new opportunities

Breast cancer occurring in women before the age of menopause continues to be a major medical and psychological challenge. Endocrine therapy has emerged as the mainstay of adjuvant treatment for women with estrogen receptor-positive tumours. Although the suppression of ovarian function (by oophorectomy, irradiation of the ovaries or gonadotropin releasing factor analogues) is effective as adjuvant therapy if used alone, its value has not been proven after chemotherapy. This is presumably because of the frequent occurrence of chemotherapy-induced amenorrhoea. Tamoxifen reduces the risk of recurrence by approximately 40%, irrespective of age and the ovarian production of estrogens. The worth of ovarian function suppression in combination with tamoxifen is unproven and is being investigated in an intergroup randomised clinical trial (SOFT [Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial]). Aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen in postmenopausal women but are only being investigated in younger patients. The use of chemotherapies is identical in younger and older patients; however, at present the efficacy of chemotherapy in addition to ovarian function suppression plus tamoxifen is unknown in premenopausal patients with endocrine responsive disease. 'Targeted' therapies such as monoclonal antibodies to human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2, HER1 and vascular endothelial growth factor, 'small molecule' inhibitors of tyrosine kinases and breast cancer vaccines are rapidly emerging. Their use depends on the function of the targeted pathways and is presently limited to clinical trials. Premenopausal patients are best treated in the framework of a clinical trial.

Cardiovascular adverse events during adjuvant endocrine therapy for early breast cancer using letrozole or tamoxifen: safety analysis of BIG 1-98 trial

PURPOSE: Previous analyses of adjuvant studies of aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen, including the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study, have suggested a small numerical excess of cardiac adverse events (AEs) on aromatase inhibitors, a reduction in the incidence of hypercholesterolemia on tamoxifen, and significantly higher incidence of thromboembolic AEs on tamoxifen. The purpose of the present study is to provide detailed updated information on these AEs in BIG 1-98. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eight thousand twenty-eight postmenopausal women with receptor-positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned (double-blind) between March 1998 and May 2003 to receive 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole, tamoxifen, or a sequence of these agents. Seven thousand nine hundred sixty-three patients who actually received therapy are included in this safety analysis, which focuses on cardiovascular events. AE recording ceased 30 days after therapy completion (or after switch on the sequential arms). RESULTS: Baseline comorbidities were balanced. At a median follow-up time of 30.1 months, we observed similar overall incidence of cardiac AEs (letrozole, 4.8%; tamoxifen, 4.7%), more grade 3 to 5 cardiac AEs on letrozole (letrozole, 2.4%; tamoxifen, 1.4%; P = .001)--an excess only partially attributable to prior hypercholesterolemia--and more overall (tamoxifen, 3.9%; letrozole, 1.7%; P < .001) and grade 3 to 5 thromboembolic AEs on tamoxifen (tamoxifen, 2.3%; letrozole, 0.9%; P < .001). There was no significant difference between tamoxifen and letrozole in incidence of hypertension or cerebrovascular events. CONCLUSION: The present safety analysis, limited to cardiovascular AEs in BIG 1-98, documents a low overall incidence of cardiovascular AEs, which differed between treatment arms.

Letrozole compared with tamoxifen for elderly patients with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer: the BIG 1-98 trial

PURPOSE: To explore potential differences in efficacy, treatment completion, and adverse events (AEs) in elderly women receiving adjuvant tamoxifen or letrozole for five years in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial. METHODS: This report includes the 4,922 patients allocated to 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen in the BIG 1-98 trial. The median follow-up was 40.4 months. Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot (STEPP) analysis was used to examine the patterns of differences in disease-free survival and incidences of AEs according to age. In addition, three categoric age groups were defined: "younger postmenopausal" patients were younger than 65 years (n = 3,127), "older" patients were 65 to 74 years old (n = 1,500), and "elderly" patients were 75 years of age or older (n = 295). RESULTS: Efficacy results for subpopulations defined by age were similar to the overall trial results: Letrozole significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS), the primary end point, compared with tamoxifen. Elderly patients were less likely to complete trial treatment, but at rates that were similar in the two treatment groups. The incidence of bone fractures, observed more often in the letrozole group, did not differ by age. In elderly patients, letrozole had a significantly higher incidence of any grade 3 to 5 protocol-specified non-fracture AE compared with tamoxifen (P = .002), but differences were not significant for thromboembolic or cardiac AEs. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant treatment with letrozole had superior efficacy (DFS) compared with tamoxifen in all age groups. On the basis of a small number of patients older than 75 years (6%), age per se should not unduly affect the choice of adjuvant endocrine therapy.