4.7 Article

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: Significantly enhanced response with docetaxel

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages 1456-1466

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.6.1456

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To compare the efficacy of neoadjuvant (NA) docetaxel (DOC) with anthracycline-based therapy and determine the efficacy of NA DOC in patients with breast cancer initially failing to respond to anthracycline-based NA chemotherapy (CT). Patients and Methods: Patients with large or locally advanced breast cancer received four pulses of cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m(2), doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), vincristine 1.5 mg/m(2), and prednisolone 40 mg (4 x CVAP) for 5 days. Clinical tumor response was assessed. Those who responded (complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]) were randomized to receive further 4 x CVAP or 4 x DOC (100 mg/m(2)). All nonresponders received 4 x DOC. Results: One hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled; 145 patients completed eight cycles of NA CT. One hundred two patients (66%) achieved a clinical response (PR or CR) after 4 x CVAP. After randomization, 50 patients received 4 x CVAP and 47 patients received 4 x DOC. In patients who received eight cycles of CT, the clinical CR (cCR) and clinical PR (cPR) (94% v 66%) and pathologic CR (pCR) (34% v 16%) response rates were higher (P=.001 and P=.04) in those who received further DOC. Intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated cCR and cPR (85% v 64%; P=.03) and pCR (31% v 15%; P=.06). Axillary lymph node examination revealed residual tumor in 33% of patients who received 8 x CVAP and 38% of patients who received further DOC. In patients who failed to respond to the initial CVAP, 4 x DOC resulted in a cCR and cPR rate of 55% and a pCR rate of 2%. Forty-four percent of these patients had residual tumor within axillary lymph nodes. Conclusion: NA DOC resulted in substantial improvement in responses to DOC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available