Explore the vast range of titles available.

For patients with breast cancer and metastases in the sentinel nodes, axillary dissection has been standard treatment. However, for patients with limited sentinel-node involvement, axillary dissection might be overtreatment. We designed IBCSG trial 23–01 to determine whether no axillary dissection was non-inferior to axillary dissection in patients with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes and tumour of maximum 5 cm. In this multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, patients were eligible if they had clinically non-palpable axillary lymph node(s) and a primary tumour of 5 cm or less and who, after sentinel-node biopsy, had one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel lymph nodes with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to either undergo axillary dissection or not to undergo axillary dissection. Randomisation was stratified by centre and menopausal status. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Non-inferiority was defined as a hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1·25 for no axillary dissection versus axillary dissection. The analysis was by intention to treat. Per protocol, disease and survival information continues to be collected yearly. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00072293. Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 28, 2010, 465 patients were randomly assigned to axillary dissection and 469 to no axillary dissection. After the exclusion of three patients, 464 patients were in the axillary dissection group and 467 patients were in the no axillary dissection group. After a median follow-up of 5·0 (IQR 3·6–7·3) years, we recorded 69 disease-free survival events in the axillary dissection group and 55 events in the no axillary dissection group. Breast-cancer-related events were recorded in 48 patients in the axillary dissection group and 47 in the no axillary dissection group (ten local recurrences in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group; three and nine contralateral breast cancers; one and nine regional recurrences; and 34 and 25 distant relapses). Other non-breast cancer events were recorded in 21 patients in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group (20 and six second non-breast malignancies; and one and two deaths not due to a cancer event). 5-year disease-free survival was 87·8% (95% CI 84·4–91·2) in the group without axillary dissection and 84·4% (80·7–88·1) in the group with axillary dissection (log-rank p=0·16; HR for no axillary dissection vs axillary dissection was 0·78, 95% CI 0·55–1·11, non-inferiority p=0·0042). Patients with reported long-term surgical events (grade 3–4) included one sensory neuropathy (grade 3), three lymphoedema (two grade 3 and one grade 4), and three motor neuropathy (grade 3), all in the group that underwent axillary dissection, and one grade 3 motor neuropathy in the group without axillary dissection. One serious adverse event was reported, a postoperative infection in the axilla in the group with axillary dissection. Axillary dissection could be avoided in patients with early breast cancer and limited sentinel-node involvement, thus eliminating complications of axillary surgery with no adverse effect on survival. None.

Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up. BIG 1-98 is a randomised, phase 3, double-blind trial of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer that compares 5 years of tamoxifen or letrozole monotherapy, or sequential treatment with 2 years of one of these drugs followed by 3 years of the other. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks, and stratified according to the two-arm or four-arm randomisation option, participating institution, and chemotherapy use. Patients, investigators, data managers, and medical reviewers were masked. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease-free survival (events were invasive breast cancer relapse, second primaries [contralateral breast and non-breast], or death without previous cancer event). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). The monotherapy comparison included patients randomly assigned to tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years. In 2005, after a significant disease-free survival benefit was reported for letrozole as compared with tamoxifen, a protocol amendment facilitated the crossover to letrozole of patients who were still receiving tamoxifen alone; Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates with inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) are used to account for selective crossover to letrozole of patients (n=619) in the tamoxifen arm. Comparison of sequential treatments to letrozole monotherapy included patients enrolled and randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. Treatment has ended for all patients and detailed safety results for adverse events that occurred during the 5 years of treatment have been reported elsewhere. Follow-up is continuing for those enrolled in the four-arm option. BIG 1-98 is registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT00004205. 8010 patients were included in the trial, with a median follow-up of 8·1 years (range 0–12·4). 2459 were randomly assigned to monotherapy with tamoxifen for 5 years and 2463 to monotherapy with letrozole for 5 years. In the four-arm option of the trial, 1546 were randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, 1548 to tamoxifen for 5 years, 1540 to letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, and 1548 to tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. At a median follow-up of 8·7 years from randomisation (range 0–12·4), letrozole monotherapy was significantly better than tamoxifen, whether by IPCW or intention-to-treat analysis (IPCW disease-free survival HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·74–0·92], overall survival HR 0·79 [0·69–0·90], DRFI HR 0·79 [0·68–0·92], BCFI HR 0·80 [0·70–0·92]; intention-to-treat disease-free survival HR 0·86 [0·78–0·96], overall survival HR 0·87 [0·77–0·999], DRFI HR 0·86 [0·74–0·998], BCFI HR 0·86 [0·76–0·98]). At a median follow-up of 8·0 years from randomisation (range 0–11·2) for the comparison of the sequential groups with letrozole monotherapy, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the four endpoints for either sequence. 8-year intention-to-treat estimates (each with SE ≤1·1%) for letrozole monotherapy, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole were 78·6%, 77·8%, 77·3% for disease-free survival; 87·5%, 87·7%, 85·9% for overall survival; 89·9%, 88·7%, 88·1% for DRFI; and 86·1%, 85·3%, 84·3% for BCFI. For postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer, a reduction in breast cancer recurrence and mortality is obtained by letrozole monotherapy when compared with tamoxifen montherapy. Sequential treatments involving tamoxifen and letrozole do not improve outcome compared with letrozole monotherapy, but might be useful strategies when considering an individual patient's risk of recurrence and treatment tolerability. Novartis, United States National Cancer Institute, International Breast Cancer Study Group.

The combined efficacy analysis of the TEXT and SOFT trials showed a significant disease-free survival benefit with exemestane plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) compared with tamoxifen plus OFS. We present patient-reported outcomes from these trials. Between Nov 7, 2003, and April 7, 2011, 4717 premenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer were enrolled in TEXT or SOFT to receive unmasked adjuvant treatment with 5 years of exemestane plus OFS or tamoxifen plus OFS. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin, bilateral oophorectomy, or bilateral ovarian irradiation were used to achieve OFS. Chemotherapy use was optional. Randomisation with permuted blocks was done with the International Breast Cancer Study Group's internet-based system and was stratified by chemotherapy use and status of lymph nodes. Patients completed a quality of life (QoL) form comprising several global and symptom indicators at baseline, every 6 months for 24 months, and then every year during years 3 to 6. Differences in the change of QoL from baseline between the two treatments were tested at 6 months, 24 months, and 60 months with mixed-models for repeated measures for each trial with and without chemotherapy and overall. The analysis was by intention to treat. At the time of analysis, the median follow-up was 5·7 years (IQR 3·7–6·9); treatment and follow-up of patients continue. The trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, as NCT00066703 (TEXT) and NCT00066690 (SOFT). Patients on tamoxifen plus OFS were more affected by hot flushes and sweats over 5 years than were those on exemestane plus OFS, although these symptoms improved. Patients on exemestane plus OFS reported more vaginal dryness, greater loss of sexual interest, and difficulties becoming aroused than did patients on tamoxifen plus OFS; these differences persisted over time. An increase in bone or joint pain was more pronounced, particularly in the short term, in patients on exemestane plus OFS than patients on tamoxifen plus OFS. Changes in global QoL indicators from baseline were small and similar between treatments over the 5 years. Overall, from a QoL perspective, there is no strong indication to favour either exemestane plus OFS or tamoxifen plus OFS. The distinct effects of the two treatments on the burden of endocrine symptoms need to be addressed with patients individually. Pfizer, International Breast Cancer Study Group, and US National Cancer Institute.

Patients with isolated locoregional recurrences (ILRR) of breast cancer have a high risk of distant metastasis and death from breast cancer. We aimed to establish whether adjuvant chemotherapy improves the outcome of such patients. The CALOR trial was a pragmatic, open-label, randomised trial that accrued patients with histologically proven and completely excised ILRR after unilateral breast cancer who had undergone a mastectomy or lumpectomy with clear surgical margins. Eligible patients were enrolled from hospitals worldwide and were centrally randomised (1:1) to chemotherapy (type selected by the investigator; multidrug for at least four courses recommended) or no chemotherapy, using permuted blocks, and stratified by previous chemotherapy, oestrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor status, and location of ILRR. Patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive ILRR received adjuvant endocrine therapy, radiation therapy was mandated for patients with microscopically involved surgical margins, and anti-HER2 therapy was optional. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00074152. From Aug 22, 2003, to Jan 31, 2010, 85 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy and 77 were assigned to no chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 4·9 years (IQR 3·6–6 ·0), 24 (28%) patients had disease-free survival events in the chemotherapy group compared with 34 (44%) in the no chemotherapy group. 5-year disease-free survival was 69% (95% CI 56–79) with chemotherapy versus 57% (44–67) without chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·35–0·99]; p=0·046). Adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more effective for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative ILRR (pinteraction=0·046), but analyses of disease-free survival according to the oestrogen-receptor status of the primary tumour were not statistically significant (pinteraction=0·43). Of the 81 patients who received chemotherapy, 12 (15%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and intestinal infection. Adjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended for patients with completely resected ILRR of breast cancer, especially if the recurrence is oestrogen-receptor negative. US Department of Health and Human Services, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Frontier Science and Technology Research Foundation, Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Swedish Cancer Society, Oncosuisse, Cancer Association of South Africa, Foundation for Clinical Research of Eastern Switzerland (OSKK), Grupo Español de Investigación en Cáncer de Mama (GEICAM), and the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists' Group (BOOG).

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the prognostic value of androgen receptor (AR) expression in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, treated with endocrine therapy, with or without the addition of chemotherapy. A consecutive series of 953 patients with ER-positive breast cancer, treated between 1998 and 2003, was selected. Repeated immunohistochemistry confirmed the expression of ER in the tumor of 938 patients. AR expression was measured by immunohistochemistry. The Kaplan-Meier method, logrank test and multivariate Cox models were used to explore the impact of AR expression on time to relapse (TTR) and disease specific survival (DSS) in all patients and in subgroups treated with chemo-endocrine therapy or endocrine therapy alone. AR immunoreactivity was assessable in 859 tumors and positive in 609 (70.9%). AR expression was a significant marker of good prognosis for TTR (P = 0.001) and DSS (P < 0.001). This effect was particularly evident in the group of patients receiving chemo-endocrine therapy (TTR (P = 0.015) and DSS (P < 0.001)). Cox models confirmed AR as an independent variable for both TTR (P = 0.003, HR 0.444, 95%CI 0.258-0.765) and DSS (P < 0.001, HR 0.135, 95%CI 0.054-0.337). Thus, we focused on ER-positive luminal B breast cancer that may be selected for chemotherapy because of their more aggressive immunophenotype. In this subset AR expression identified a group of patients with better prognosis for TTR (P = 0.017, HR 0.521, 95%CI 0.306-0.888) and DSS (P = 0.001, HR 0.276, 95% CI 0.130-0.588). AR expression is an independent prognostic factor of better outcome in patients with ER-positive breast cancers.

Background Invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) account for 10–15% of all breast cancers. They are characterized by an elevated endocrine responsiveness and by a long lasting risk of relapse over time. Here we report for the first time an analysis of clinical and pathological features associated with the risk of late distant recurrence in ILCs. Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients with hormone receptor–positive ILC operated at the European Institute of Oncology (EIO) between June 1994 and December 2010 and scheduled to receive at least 5 years of endocrine treatment. The aim was to identify clinical and pathological variables that provide prognostic information in the period beginning 5 years after definitive surgery. The cumulative incidence of distant metastases (CI-DM) from 5 years after surgery was the prospectively defined primary endpoint. Results One thousand eight hundred seventy-two patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 8.7 years. Increased tumor size and positive nodal status were significantly associated with higher risk of late distant recurrence, but nodal status had a significant lower prognostic value in late follow-up period (DM-HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 2.06–5.01) as compared with the first 5 years of follow-up (DM-HR, 9.55; 95% CI, 5.64–16.2; heterogeneity p value 0.002). Elevated Ki-67 labeling index (LI) retained a significant and independent prognostic value even after the first 5 years from surgery (DM-HR, 1.81; 95% CI 1.19–2.75), and it also stratified the prognosis of ILC patients subgrouped according to lymph node status. A combined score, obtained integrating the previously validated Clinical Treatment Score post 5 years (CTS5) and Ki-67 LI, had a strong association with the risk of late distant recurrence of ILCs. Conclusion We identified factors associated with the risk of late distant recurrence in ER-positive ILCs and developed a simple prognostic score, based on data that are readily available, which warrants further validation.

Background Various patient reported quality-of-life indicators are independently prognostic for survival in metastatic breast cancer and other cancers. The same measures recorded at first diagnosis of early breast cancer carry no corresponding prognostic information. The present study aims to assess at what time in the disease evolution the prognostic association appears. Methods Among 8024 patients enrolled in one of seven randomized controlled trials in early-stage breast cancer 3247 had a breast cancer relapse after a median follow-up of 12.1 years. Of these 677 had completed QL indicator assessments within defined windows 1, 2 or 3 months prior to relapse. We performed Cox regression analyses using these assessments and using identical instruments after relapse. All analyses were stratified by trial and adjusted for baseline clinicopathologic factors. Results QL indicators in the months before relapse were not significantly prognostic for subsequent survival with the possibly chance exception of mood at the second month before relapse. After relapse, physical well-being was statistically significantly associated with survival ( P  < 0.001). This prognostic significance increased in later post-relapse assessments. Similar findings were observed using patient-reported indicators for nausea and vomiting, appetite, coping effort, and health perception. Conclusions Before cancer relapse, QL indicators were not generally prognostic for subsequent survival. After relapse, QL indicators substantially predicted OS, with a stronger association later in the course of relapsed disease. Simple patient perception of disease burden seems unlikely to explain this sudden change: rather the patient’s awareness of disease relapse must contribute.

We previously reported the 5-year results of the phase 3 IBCSG 23-01 trial comparing disease-free survival in patients with breast cancer with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes randomly assigned to either axillary dissection or no axillary dissection. The results showed no difference in disease-free survival between the groups and showed non-inferiority of no axillary dissection relative to axillary dissection. The current analysis presents the results of the study after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7). In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 27 hospitals and cancer centres in nine countries. Eligible women could be of any age with clinical, mammographic, ultrasonographic, or pathological diagnosis of breast cancer with largest lesion diameter of 5 cm or smaller, and one or more metastatic sentinel nodes, all of which were 2 mm or smaller and with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) before surgery (mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery) to no axillary dissection or axillary dissection using permuted blocks generated by a web-based congruence algorithm, with stratification by centre and menopausal status. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (as randomly assigned). Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received their allocated treatment (as treated). We did a one-sided test for non-inferiority of no axillary dissection by comparing the observed hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival with a margin of 1·25. This 10-year follow-up analysis was not prespecified in the trial's protocol and thus was not adjusted for multiple, sequential testing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00072293. Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 8, 2010, 6681 patients were screened and 934 randomly assigned to no axillary dissection (n=469) or axillary dissection (n=465). Three patients were ineligible and were excluded from the trial after randomisation. Disease-free survival at 10 years was 76·8% (95% CI 72·5–81·0) in the no axillary dissection group, compared with 74·9% (70·5–79·3) in the axillary dissection group (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·65–1·11; log-rank p=0·24; p=0·0024 for non-inferiority). Long-term surgical complications included lymphoedema of any grade in 16 (4%) of 453 patients in the no axillary dissection group and 60 (13%) of 447 in the axillary dissection group, sensory neuropathy of any grade in 57 (13%) in the no axillary dissection group versus 85 (19%) in the axillary dissection group, and motor neuropathy of any grade (14 [3%] in the no axillary dissection group vs 40 [9%] in the axillary dissection group). One serious adverse event (postoperative infection and inflamed axilla requiring hospital admission) was attributed to axillary dissection; the event resolved without sequelae. The findings of the IBCSG 23-01 trial after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7) corroborate those obtained at 5 years and are consistent with those of the 10-year follow-up analysis of the Z0011 trial. Together, these findings support the current practice of not doing an axillary dissection when the tumour burden in the sentinel nodes is minimal or moderate in patients with early breast cancer. International Breast Cancer Study Group.

The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial (a randomised double-blind phase III trial) has shown that letrozole significantly improves disease-free survival (DFS) compared with tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. Our aim was to establish whether the benefit of letrozole versus tamoxifen differs according to the ERBB2 status of tumours. The BIG 1-98 trial consists of four treatment groups that compare 5 years of monotherapy with letrozole or tamoxifen, and sequential administration of one drug for 2 years followed by the other drug for 3 years. Our study includes data from the 4922 patients randomly assigned to the two monotherapy treatment groups (letrozole or tamoxifen for 5 years; 51 months median follow-up [range <1 to 90 months]). A central assessment of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and ERBB2 status using paraffin-embedded primary tumour material was possible for 3650 (74%) patients. ER, PgR, and ERBB2 expression were measured by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and ERBB2-positivity was confirmed by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH). Positive staining in at least 1% of cells was considered to show presence of ER or PgR expression. Tumours were deemed ERBB2-positive if amplified by FISH, or, for the few tumours with unassessable or unavailable FISH results, if they were IHC 3+. Hazard ratios (HR) estimated by Cox modelling were used to compare letrozole with tamoxifen for DFS, which was the primary endpoint, and to assess treatment-by-covariate interactions. The BIG 1-98 trial is registered on the clinical trials site of the US National Cancer Institute website http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00004205. By central assessment 7% (257 of 3650) of tumours were classified as ERBB2-positive. In 3533 patients with tumours confirmed to express ER, DFS was poorer in patients with ERBB2-positive tumours (n=239) than in those with ERBB2-negative tumours (n=3294; HR 2·09 [95% CI 1·59–2·76]; p<0·0001). There was no statistical evidence of heterogeneity in the treatment effect according to ERBB2 status of the tumour (p=0·60 for interaction), thus, letrozole improves DFS compared with tamoxifen regardless of ERBB2 status. The observed HRs were 0·62 (95% CI 0·37–1·03) for ERBB2-positive tumours and 0·72 (0·59–0·87) for ERBB2-negative tumours. A benefit of letrozole over tamoxifen was noted, irrespective of ERBB2 status of the tumour, and, therefore, ERBB2 status does not seem to be a selection criterion for treatment with letrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer.

This trial did not support routine use of ovarian suppression in premenopausal breast cancer. Nevertheless, there may be some benefit from ovarian suppression in the subgroup of younger patients whose menses return after adjuvant chemotherapy, but also more symptoms. Adjuvant endocrine therapy with tamoxifen has been recommended for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor–positive breast cancer (positive for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, or both) during the past 15 years. 1 , 2 The value of therapeutic suppression of ovarian estrogen production in premenopausal women who receive tamoxifen is uncertain. 3 The American Society of Clinical Oncology endorsed guidelines recommending that ovarian ablation or suppression (hereafter, ovarian suppression) not be added routinely to adjuvant therapy in premenopausal women. 4 Chemotherapy-induced ovarian suppression (amenorrhea) is correlated with a reduced risk of relapse 5 – 7 but is less likely to be achieved in very young women. International consensus guidelines . . .