Project description:BackgroundAdjuvant bisphosphonates, when given in a low-estrogen environment, can decrease breast cancer recurrence and death. Treatment guidelines include recommendations for adjuvant bisphosphonates in postmenopausal patients. SWOG/Alliance/Canadian Cancer Trials Group/ECOG-ACRIN/NRG Oncology study S0307 compared the efficacy of three bisphosphonates in early-stage breast cancer.MethodsPatients with stage I-III breast cancer were randomly assigned to 3 years of intravenous zoledronic acid, oral clodronate, or oral ibandronate. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) with overall survival as a secondary outcome. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsA total of 6097 patients enrolled. Median age was 52.7 years. Prior to being randomly assigned, 73.2% patients indicated preference for oral vs intravenous formulation. DFS did not differ across arms in a log-rank test (P = .49); 5-year DFS was 88.3% (zoledronic acid: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.9% to 89.6%), 87.6% (clodronate: 95% CI = 86.1% to 88.9%), and 87.4% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 85.6% to 88.9%). Additionally, 5-year overall survival did not differ between arms (log rank P = .50) and was 92.6% (zoledronic acid: 95% CI = 91.4% to 93.6%), 92.4% (clodronate: 95% CI = 91.2% to 93.5%), and 92.9% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 91.5% to 94.1%). Bone as first site of recurrence did not differ between arms (P = .93). Analyses based on age and tumor subtypes showed no treatment differences. Grade 3/4 toxicity was 8.8% (zoledronic acid), 8.3% (clodronate), and 10.5% (ibandronate). Osteonecrosis of the jaw was highest for zoledronic acid (1.26%) compared with clodronate (0.36%) and ibandronate (0.77%).ConclusionsWe found no evidence of differences in efficacy by type of bisphosphonate, either in overall analysis or subgroups. Despite an increased rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw with zoledronic acid, overall toxicity grade differed little across arms. Given that patients expressed preference for oral formulation, efforts to make oral agents available in the United States should be considered.
Project description:Approximately 20% of breast cancers overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) protein, mainly as a result of gene amplification. The receptor tyrosine kinase is believed to play a critical role in the pathogenesis and further proliferation of these tumors. The application of trastuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against the extracellular domain of HER2 protein, to HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer has significantly improved treatment outcomes. Following this success, several phase III trials have evaluated the role of trastuzumab in the adjuvant setting, with the result that trastuzumab use is now the standard of care for most HER2-positive early breast cancer patients. In this paper, we review these pivotal phase III trials. We also discuss unresolved issues in adjuvant treatment with trastuzumab, including target patient population, sequential or concurrent use with chemotherapy or radiation, treatment duration, cardiotoxicity, and the possibility of eliminating chemotherapy. Following confirmation of its ability to partially overcome trastuzumab resistance, we also discuss the role of lapatinib in adjuvant use.
Project description:The role of postmastectomy radiotherapy and regional nodal irradiation after radical mastectomy is defined in high-risk patients with locally advanced tumors, positive margins, and unfavorable biology. The benefit of postmastectomy radiotherapy in intermediate-risk patients (T3N0 tumors) remains a matter of controversy. It has been demonstrated that radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery lowers the locoregional recurrence rate compared with surgery alone and improves the overall survival rate. In patients with four or more positive lymph nodes or extracapsular extension, regional lymph node irradiation is indicated regardless of the surgery type (breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy). Despite the consensus that patients with more than three positive lymph nodes should be treated with radiotherapy, there is controversy regarding the recommendations for patients with one to three involved lymph nodes. In patients with N0 disease with negative findings on axillary surgery, there is a trend to administer regional lymph node irradiation in patients with a high risk of recurrence. In patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy and mastectomy, adjuvant radiotherapy should be administered in cases of clinical stage III and/or ≥ypN1. In patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy and breast-conserving surgery, postoperative radiotherapy is indicated irrespective of pathological response.
Project description:BackgroundThe role of bisphosphonates (BP) in early breast cancer (BC) has been considered controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that appraised the effects of BP on survival in early BC.MethodsRCTs were identified by searching the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE databases and conference proceedings. Hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and relative risks of adverse events were estimated and pooled.ResultsThirteen trials met the inclusion criteria, evaluating a total of 15,762 patients. Meta-analysis of ten trials which reported OS revealed no statistically significant benefit in OS for BP (HR 0.89, 95% CI?=?0.79 to 1.01). Meta-analysis of nine trials which reported the DFS revealed no benefit in DFS (HR 0.95 (0.81-1.12)). Meta-analysis upon menopausal status showed a statistically significant better DFS in the BP-treated patients (HR 0.81(0.69-0.95)). In meta-regression, chemotherapy was negatively associated with HR of survival.ConclusionsOur meta-analysis indicates a positive effect for adjuvant BP on survival only in postmenopausal patients. Meta-regression demonstrated a negative association between chemotherapy use BP effect on survival. Further large scale RCTs are warranted to unravel the specific subgroups that would benefit from the addition of BP in the adjuvant setting.
Project description:Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies in females. It is an etiologically complex disease driven by a multitude of cellular pathways. The proliferation and spread of breast cancer is intimately linked to cellular glucose metabolism, given that glucose is an essential cellular metabolic substrate and that insulin signalling has mitogenic effects. Growing interest has focused on anti-diabetic agents in the management of breast cancer. Epidemiologic studies show that metformin reduces cancer incidence and mortality among type 2 diabetic patients. Preclinical in vitro and in vivo research provides intriguing insight into the cellular mechanisms behind the oncostatic effects of metformin. This article aims to provide an overview of the mechanisms in which metformin may elicit its anti-cancerous effects and discuss its potential role as an adjuvant in the management of breast cancer.
Project description:BackgroundThe optimal sequencing of chemotherapy and radiotherapy after breast surgery was largely studied but remains controversial. Concurrent chemo-radiotherapy is a valuable method for adjuvant treatment of breast cancer which is under ongoing research program in our hospital. We are evaluating the feasibility of the concomitant use of chemotherapy retrospectively.MethodsTwo hundred forty four women having breast cancer were investigated in a retrospective study. All patients were either treated by radical surgery or breast conservative surgery. The study compares two adjuvant treatments associating concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In the first group (group A) the patients were treated by chemotherapy and radiotherapy in concomitant way using anthracycline (n = 110). In the second group (group B) the patients were treated by chemotherapy and radiotherapy in concomitant way using CMF treatment (n = 134). Chemotherapy was administered in six cycles, one each 3 weeks. Radiotherapy delivered a radiation dose of 50 Gy on the whole breast (or on the external wall) and/or on the lymphatic region. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the rates of disease free survival, loco-regional recurrence-free survival and overall survival. The Pearson Khi2 test was used to analyse the homogeneity between the two groups. The log-rank test was used to evaluate the differences between the two groups A and B.ResultsAfter 76.4 months median follow-up (65.3 months mean follow up), only one patient relapsed to loco-regional breast cancer when the treatment was based on anthracycline. However, 8 patients relapsed to loco-regional breast cancer when the treatment was based on CMF. In the anthracycline group, the disease free survival after 5 years, was 80.4% compared to 76.4% in the CMF group (Log-rank test: p = 0.136). The overall survival after 5 years was 82.5% and 81.1% in the anthracycline and CMF groups respectively (Log-rank test: p = 0.428). The loco-regional free survival at 5 years was equal to 98.6% in group A and 94% in group B (Log-rank test: p = 0,033). The rate of grade II and grade III anaemia was 13.9% and 6.7% in anthracycline group and CMF group respectively (Khi2-test: p = 0.009). The rate of grade II and grade III skin dermatitis toxicity was 4.5% in the group A and 0% in the group B (Khi2-test: p = 0.013).ConclusionFrom the 5 years retrospective investigation we showed similar disease free survival and overall survival in the two concurrent chemo-radiotherapy treatments based on anthracycline and CMF. However in the loco-regional breast cancer the treatment based on anthracycline was significantly better than that of the treatment based on CMF. There was more haematological and skin dermatitis toxicity in the anthracycline group.
Project description:Introduction: Bisphosphonates are well known above all for their use in the treatment of osteoporosis. They also play an important role as accompanying therapy for advanced tumour diseases with extensive spread into the skeletal system. Their adjuvant use in the treatment of breast cancer without bony metastases is currently a subject of controversial discussion. The objective of the present evaluation is to describe the use of bisphosphonates in the therapy for breast cancer. We will show how frequently bisphosphonates are used, which bisphosphonates are preferred and what specific features patients under bisphosphonate therapy exhibit. Methods and Materials: The pseudonymous data set from the biobank of the German PATH foundation was used for the evaluation. From the total collective, 2492 patients were selected after consideration of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected patient collective was divided into two groups (with and without bisphosphonate therapy) and the two groups compared with one another with the help of descriptive statistics. Results: 17.5 % of the 2492 patients had prescriptions for a bisphosphonate as part of their therapy. The most frequently administered bisphosphonate was zoledronate. Pathological (induced by tumour therapy) osteoporosis was the most frequently stated indication among the bisphosphonate patients, followed by consumption starting prior to the breast cancer therapy and treatment of bony metastases. Patients under bisphosphonate and antihormonal therapy frequently received an aromatase inhibitor as the active principle in the antihormonal therapy whereas patients under antihormonal therapy but without bisphosphonates more frequently received tamoxifen as active principle. Ten of the 2492 patients reported receiving bisphosphonate therapy as prophylaxis for bony metastases without a documented and approved indication. Use of bisphosphonates in the course of the GAIN, ICE, SUCCESS or, respectively, NATAN trials was reported by 29 of the 2492 patients. Conclusions: In the PATH collective, bisphosphonates were employed above all for the treatment of (tumour therapy-induced) osteoporosis and bony metastases. Off-label use and participation in clinical trials played only a minor role in this patient collective. Against the background of the uncertain data status for the adjuvant use of bisphosphonates, the development (and use) of standardised, validated questionnaires to record the indications for and frequency of use of bisphosphonate therapy is recommended.
Project description:BackgroundPrevious systematic reviews showed additional benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates (BP) in the treatment of periodontitis. In contrast, it is unclear the effect of BP in patients with diabetes and smokers, its pooled effect when administered locally or systemically is also unknown.ObjectivesThis study aimed to systematically review the literature about the use of BP as adjuvant to nonsurgical scaling and root planning (SRP).MethodologyThis study followed the PRISMA guideline. This study included randomized clinical trials that administered locally or systemically BPs as adjuvant for periodontal treatment. Five databases were used. Meta-analyses were performed, using the pooled mean differences (MD) for clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD). Standard mean difference (SMD) was used for radiographic assessment (RADIO). Subgroup analyses were performed for locally delivered meta-analyses, considering diabetes and smoking exposure.ResultsThirteen studies were included. It was showed MD of 1.52 mm (95%CI: 0.97-2.07) and 1.44 mm (95%CI: 1.08-1.79) for PPD reduction and CAL gain, respectively, for locally delivered BP. BP was not able to provide significant improvements in smokers (subgroup analysis) when considering CAL (MD: 1.37; 95%CI: -0.17-2.91) and PPD (MD: 1.35; 95%CI: -0.13-2.83). Locally delivered BP also improved significantly the RADIO assessments (SMD: 4.34; 95%CI: 2.94-5.74). MD for systemically administered BP was 0.40 mm (95%CI: 0.21-0.60), 0.51 mm (95%CI: 0.19-0.83) and 1.05 (95%CI: 0.80-1.31) for PPD, CAL and RADIO, respectively.ConclusionThe administration of BP in adjunct to SRP may result in additional clinical effects.
Project description:BackgroundAdjuvant bisphosphonates (BPs) are recommended as part of routine early breast cancer treatment for many postmenopausal (PM) women within the past year. There is a paucity of 'real world' data on compliance and patient satisfaction with oral BPs in this population. The aim of our study was to investigate patient reported compliance and toxicity of these drugs in a retrospective cohort study.Patients and methods413 patient were identified as receiving adjuvant oral BPs as part of their breast cancer treatment in the past 12 months from five NHS hospitals. The validated Osteoporosis Patient Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (OPSAT-Q) was sent to all suitable patients (n = 389).Results295 (76%) of patients responded. Average age was median (range) 67 (35-89). The majority of patients had T1 (52%), N0 (61%) grade 2 (58%) ER positive (87%), HER2 negative (84%) breast cancer and were PM at diagnosis of breast cancer (93%). All patients had been prescribed at least 1 month of oral ibandronate 50 mg daily. Review of items rated on the 7-point scale (1 = very dissatisfied to 7 = very satisfied), the mean item scores ranged from 5.0 (lowest) for time required to take oral BPs, to 6.1 (highest) for how easy it is to remember to take the medication. <10% of patients were extremely bothered by heartburn or stomach upset. 16% of responders stopped oral BPs with 10% of those converting onto IV BPs.ConclusionsPrevalence of severe side effects in a 'real world' population of PM women receiving adjuvant BPs is low and these drugs are generally well accepted and tolerated by patients.