ONCOLOGY.
No. 11
The Kumar/Leonard Article Reviewed
Adjuvant Hormonal Therapy in Early Breast Cancer
By NAN SOON WONG, MD
Clinical Fellow
Medical Oncology
KATHLEEN I. PRITCHARD, MD
Chair, Breast Cancer Site Group
Head, Clinical Trials & Epidemiology
Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre
Professor, Departments of Medicine and Public Health Sciences
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario
Canada |
October 1, 2005
Breast cancer is a systemic disease
with 10-year relapse risks
after surgery alone ranging between
30% and 50%.[1] About 60%
to 75% of breast cancers are hormonereceptor-
positive[2] and are potentially
responsive to endocrine therapy,
which remains a cornerstone in the adjuvant
therapy of such tumors in this
era of targeted therapy and genomics.
The article by Kumar and Leonard
provides a broad overview of adjuvant
endocrine therapy and highlights the
surrounding controversies. In this review,
we will emphasize key developments
and discuss ongoing trials that
seek to address these controversies.
Tamoxifen in Pre- and
Postmenopausal Women
In the 2000 overview by the Early
Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative
Group (EBCTCG), 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen(Drug information on tamoxifen) reduced annual relapse
by 41%, annual breast cancer mortality
by 34%, and contralateral breast
cancer by one-third in women with
estrogen-receptor (ER)-positive tumors.[
3] These benefits are largely
irrespective of age at study entry, nodal
status, and use of chemotherapy,
and persist during years 5 to 9 of
follow-up, indicating a protective
carryover effect.
There are, however, limited data
for adding tamoxifen to chemotherapy
in premenopausal women compared
to chemotherapy alone. Only
205 women in this category were included
in the 2000 EBCTCG overview
(personal communication, R.
Peto) in whom a small but significant
reduction in relapse and a trend toward
improved overall survival was observed
with the addition of tamoxifen.
Results from individual trials are
conflicting but, in aggregate, point
toward a small benefit in this setting.[
4-7] We await information from
two completed trials-the European
Organization for Research and Treatment
of Cancer (EORTC) 01901 trial,
which randomized women to 3 years
of tamoxifen or not after completion of
six cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy
and which has been presented but not
with subgroup analysis by menopausal
status,[8] and the National Cancer Institute
of Canada (NCIC) MA.12 trial,
which randomized women after
adjuvant chemotherapy to tamoxifen
or placebo for 5 years.
Duration of Therapy
Early adjuvant tamoxifen trials tested
2 years of therapy compared to no treatment.[
9-11] Subsequent trials compared
5 years of therapy to no treatment[11,12]
and led to randomized comparisons of
2 vs 5 years and 5 vs 10 years of tamoxifen.[
7,13-16] These studies provide
conclusive evidence that 5 years is superior
to 2 years of therapy.[13,14]
In contrast, there is uncertainty regarding
the extension of tamoxifen
therapy beyond 5 years.[7,15,16] An
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
(ECOG) study did find improved time
to relapse in ER-positive women, but
this was a very small trial involving
only 194 patients.[16]
Two large studies under way will
hopefully provide definitive information
concerning extended tamoxifen
therapy. The Adjuvant Tamoxifen
Longer Against Shorter (ATLAS) trial
comparing 5 vs 10 years of tamoxifen
has completed accrual and is in the
follow-up phase, while the Adjuvant
Tamoxifen Treatment Offer More
(aTTom) trial is a UK counterpart to
ATLAS with a similar trial design.
Ovarian Ablation in
Premenopausal Women
Adjuvant ovarian ablation either
with or without tamoxifen has been
compared against no treatment or chemotherapy
alone. Studies have also
examined the value of adding ovarian
ablation to chemotherapy. As Kumar
and Leonard have pointed out, the
overall evidence suggests that ovarian
ablation improves disease-free and
overall survival in the absence of chemotherapy.[
3,17] Multiple studies
have shown the equivalence or superiority
of ovarian ablation with or
without tamoxifen compared to CMF
(cyclophosphamide, methotrexate(Drug information on methotrexate), fluorouracil(Drug information on fluorouracil)) or FEC50 (fluorouracil, epirubicin(Drug information on epirubicin) at 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide(Drug information on cyclophosphamide)).[
18-21] These studies
have limited generalizability because
of the increasing use of superior second-
and third-generation regimens.
Neither data from the 2000
EBCTCG overview nor from individual
trials demonstrate improvement
in outcomes when ovarian
ablation is added to chemotherapy,[
3,22-25] although exploratory
subset analysis in one trial showed a
trend toward improved disease-free
survival in women younger than
age 40 and women who do not become
menopausal after chemotherapy.[
22] In contrast, the addition of
ovarian ablation plus tamoxifen to
chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy
alone has been found to improve
disease-free survival.[22,26]
Three complementary randomized
studies examining the optimal combination
of endocrine therapy for premenopausal
women are ongoing. The
Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial
(SOFT) compares ovarian ablation
plus either tamoxifen or exemestane(Drug information on exemestane)
(Aromasin) to the current standard of
tamoxifen alone for women who are
not candidates for chemotherapy or
who remain premenopausal after completion
of adjuvant chemotherapy. The
Tamoxifen and Exemestane Trial
(TEXT) compares the relative benefit
of adding tamoxifen vs exemestane
to upfront ovarian ablation. The Premenopausal
Endocrine Responsive
Chemotherapy (PERCHE) study is
examining the merit of adding chemotherapy
to complete estrogen
blockade by ovarian ablation plus either
tamoxifen or exemestane.
Aromatase Inhibitors in
Postmenopausal Women
Data from multiple large randomized
trials support the use of aromatase
inhibitors in hormone-receptor-positive
postmenopausal women in the adjuvant
setting (see Table 1)[27-34] and
have been synthesized in an American
Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Technology Assessment.[35] These
studies have demonstrated improvements
in disease-free and distant disease-
free survival as well as a reduction
in contralateral breast cancer. No overall
survival advantage has emerged, except
in a subset analysis of node-positive
women in the MA.17 trial presented
at the 2004 ASCO meeting.[29] Full
publication of these data is awaited.
These studies have also highlighted
the impact of long-term aromatase
inhibitors on bone and cardiovascular
health. Fracture incidence is increased
in patients who receive an aromatase
inhibitor,[27-33] significantly so in
the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or
in Combination (ATAC) and Breast
International Group (BIG 1-98) trials.
Numerically, more cardiovascular
events occurred in the Intergroup
Exemestane Study (IES) and significantly
more serious cardiac events
were noted in the BIG 1-98 study
with aromatase inhibitor therapy.[
31,33] It is interesting to note that
in MA.17-the only trial to compare
an aromatase inhibitor with placebo-
no increase in cardiac events was seen
in the letrozole(Drug information on letrozole) (Femara) arm.[29]
Hence, it is plausible that the difference
in cardiac event rates between
patients who received an aromatase
inhibitor and those who received
tamoxifen in BIG 1-98 and IES could
have resulted not from a negative effect
of an aromastase inhibitor but
from a positive effect of tamoxifen, a
drug that may have cardioprotective
effects.[36-38]
Kumar and Leonard have pointed
to the controversy arising from early
termination of MA.17-a move that
was recommended by an independent
data and safety monitoring committee
based on data from protocol-specified
interim analysis indicating a
larger than unexpected benefit from
letrozole. There were concerns that
the crossover of patients would lead
to loss of information regarding any
overall survival and distant disease-
free survival benefits, and that the
findings could not be used to support
5 years of letrozole treatment because
none of the patients had received the
drug for that long. Further follow-up
of MA.17, however, has shown a persistent
disease-free survival advantage.
In addition, patients who have
completed 5 years of letrozole therapy
are being offered re-randomization
to a further 5 years of therapy vs
placebo to determine the optimal duration
of treatment.
Sequence and Type of
Aromatase Inhibitor
BIG 1-98 addresses the issue of
the optimal sequence of adjuvant aromatase
inhibitor therapy. This study
randomized 8,010 postmenopausal
women with endocrine-responsive
early-stage breast cancer to one of
four arms: tamoxifen for 5 years, letrozole
for 5 years, tamoxifen for 2 years
followed by letrozole for 3 years, or
the reverse sequence. Preliminary results
with a median follow-up of 25.8
months comparing upfront tamoxifen
vs letrozole demonstrated improved
disease-free and distant relapse-free
survival for those receiving letrozole,
but as yet, no significant difference in
overall survival.[33] A higher 5-year
incidence of death without recurrence
on the letrozole arm (3.1% vs 1.8%,
P = .08) due to more cerebrovascular
accidents (7 vs 1) and cardiac events
(13 vs 6) was observed.
Another important ongoing study
is NCIC MA.27, which is comparing
adjuvant exemestane to anastrozole(Drug information on anastrozole)
(Arimidex), each for 5 years, and
seeks to answer whether a steroidal
or nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor is
superior.
Because the crossover results of
BIG 1-98 will not be available for some
years, different groups have proposed
mathematical models to estimate clinical
outcomes from initial, sequential,
or extended aromatase therapy.[39,40]
Burstein et al developed Markov models
incorporating disease-free survival
hazard ratios from published trials to
derive recurrence probabilities in hypothetical
cohorts of women. They
suggest that disease-free survival was
best with initial aromatase inhibitor
therapy in patients with ER-positive,
PR-negative tumors, whereas patients
with ER-positive, PR-positive tumors
have the best disease-free survival
when given tamoxifen for 2.5 years
followed by an aromatase inhibitor.
Conclusions
Progress has been made in adjuvant
endocrine therapy for early breast
cancer. The challenge remaining is to
determine the optimal incorporation
of new and existing treatment modalities
into everyday patient care.
SATISH KUMAR, MBBS, MRCP (UK), R.C.F. LEONARD, BSc, MBBS, MD,
1. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, et al:
Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial
comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy
with or without radiation. N Engl J Med
312:674-681, 1985.
2. Anderson WF, Chatterjee N, Ershler WB,
et al: Estrogen receptor breast cancer phenotypes
in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and
End Results database. Breast Cancer Res Treat
76:27-36, 2002.
3. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative
Group (EBCTCG): Effects of chemotherapy
and hormonal therapy for early breast
cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: An
overview of the randomized trials. Lancet
365:1687-1717, 2005.
4. Andersson M, Kamby C, Jensen MB, et
al: Tamoxifen in high risk premenopausal
women with primary breast cancer receiving
adjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer 35:1659-
1666, 1999.
5. Hutchins L, Green S, Ravdin P, et al: CMF
versus CAF ± tamoxifen in high-risk node-negative
patients and a natural history follow-up
study in low-risk node negative patients: Update
of tamoxifen results (abstract 1). Breast
Cancer Res Treat 57:25, 1999.
6. Colleoni M, Gelber S, Snyder R, et al: Randomized
comparison of adjuvant tamoxifen
(Tam) versus no hormonal treatment for premenopausal
women with node-positive (N+),
early stage breast cancer: First results of International
Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 13-
93 (abstract 532). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol
22(14S):10, 2004.
7. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J, et al: Five
versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy
for breast cancer patients with negative lymph
nodes and estrogen receptor-positive tumors. J
Natl Cancer Inst 88:1529-1542, 1996.
8. Paridaens R, Dyczka J, Rutgers EJT, et al:
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy followed
by adjuvant tamoxifen versus nil for patients with
operable breast cancer. First results of a randomized
phase III trial EORTC 10901 (abstract 70).
Eur J Cancer 2(suppl 3):A-49, 2004.
9. NATO: Controlled trial of tamoxifen as
adjuvant agent in management of early breast
cancer. Interim analysis at four years by
Nolvadex Adjuvant Trial Organisation. Lancet
1:257-261, 1983.
10. NATO: Controlled trial of tamoxifen as a
single adjuvant agent in the management of early
breast cancer. Nolvadex Adjuvant Trial
Organisation. Br J Cancer 57:608-611, 1988.
11. Rutqvist LE, Cedermark B, Glas U, et
al: Randomized trial of adjuvant tamoxifen in
node negative postmenopausal breast cancer.
Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group. Acta
Oncol 31:265-270, 1992.
12. Breast Cancer Trials Committee, Scottish
Cancer Trials Office (MRC): Adjuvant
tamoxifen in the management of operable breast
cancer: The Scottish Trial. Report from the
Breast Cancer Trials Committee, Scottish Cancer
Trials Office (MRC), Edinburgh. Lancet
2:171-175, 1987.
13. Swedish Breast Cancer Cooperative
Group: Randomized trial of two versus five
years of adjuvant tamoxifen for postmenopausal
early stage breast cancer. Swedish Breast Cancer
Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst
88:1543-1549, 1996.
14. Current Trials Working Party of the Cancer
Research Campaign Breast Cancer Trials
Group: Preliminary results from the cancer research
campaign trial evaluating tamoxifen duration
in women aged fifty years or older with
breast cancer. Current Trials Working Party of
the Cancer Research Campaign Breast Cancer
Trials Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1834-1839,
1996.
15. Stewart HJ, Forrest AP, Everington D, et
al: Randomised comparison of 5 years of adjuvant
tamoxifen with continuous therapy for operable
breast cancer. The Scottish Cancer Trials
Breast Group. Br J Cancer 74:297-299, 1996.
16. Tormey DC, Gray R, Falkson HC:
Postchemotherapy adjuvant tamoxifen therapy
beyond five years in patients with lymph nodepositive
breast cancer. Eastern Cooperative Oncology
Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1828-1833,
1996.
17. Love RR, Duc NB, Havighurst TC, et al:
Her-2/neu overexpression and response to
oophorectomy plus tamoxifen adjuvant therapy
in estrogen receptor-positive premenopausal
women with operable breast cancer. J Clin
Oncol 21:453-457, 2003.
18. Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group: Adjuvant
ovarian ablation versus CMF chemotherapy
in premenopausal women with pathological
stage II breast carcinoma: The Scottish
trial. Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group and
ICRF Breast Unit, Guy’s Hospital, London.
Lancet 341:1293-1298, 1993.
19. Jonat W, Kaufmann M, Sauerbrei W, et
al: Goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate,
and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy
in premenopausal patients with node-positive
breast cancer: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer
Research Association Study. J Clin Oncol
20:4628-4635, 2002.
20. Jakesz R, Hausmaninger H, Kubista E, et
al: Randomized adjuvant trial of tamoxifen and
goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate,
and fluorouracil: Evidence for the superiority
of treatment with endocrine blockade in pre
menopausal patients with hormone-responsive
breast cancer—Austrian Breast and Colorectal
Cancer Study Group Trial 5. J Clin Oncol
20:4621-4627, 2002.
21. Roche H, Kerbrat P, Bonneterre J, et al:
Complete hormonal blockade versus chemotherapy
in premenopausal early-stage breast cancer
patients (Pts) with positive hormone-receptor
(HR+) and 1-3 node-positive (N+) tumor:
Results of the FASG 06 trial (abstract 279). Proc
Am Soc Clin Oncol 19:72a, 2000.
22. Davidson N, O’Neill A, Vukov A, et al:
Effect of chemohormonal therapy in premenopausal,
node (+), receptor (+) breast cancer: An
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group phase III
Intergroup Trial (E5188, INT-0101) (abstract
249). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:67a, 1999.
23. Houghton J, Baum M, Rutqvist LE, et
al: The ZIPP trial of adjuvant zoladex in premenopausal
patients with early breast cancer:
An update at five years (abstract 359). Proc Am
Soc Clin Oncol 19:93a, 2000.
24. Baum M, Houghton J, Sawyer W, et al:
Management of premenopausal women with
early breast cancer: Is there a role for goserelin?
(abstract 103) Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 21:38a,
2001.
25. Castiglione-Gertsch M, O’Neill A,
Gelber RD, et al: Is the addition of adjuvant
chemotherapy always necessary in node negative
(N-) pre/perimenopausal breast cancer patients
(pts) who receive goserelin? First results
of IBCSG trial VIII (abstract 149). Proc Am
Soc Clin Oncol 21:38a, 2002.
26. De Placido S, De Laurentiis M, De Lena
M, et al: A randomised factorial trial of sequential
doxorubicin and CMF vs CMF and chemotherapy
alone vs chemotherapy followed by
goserelin plus tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment
of node-positive breast cancer. Br J Cancer
92:467-474, 2005.
27. Howell A, Cuzick J, Baum M: Results of
the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in
Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’
adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet
365:60-62, 2005.
28. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al: A
randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal
women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for
early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med
349:1793-1802, 2003.
29. Goss PE, Ingle JN, Martino S, et al: Updated
analysis of the NCIC CTG MA.17 randomized
placebo (P) controlled trial of letrozole (L)
after five years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal
women with early stage breast cancer (abstract
847). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22(14S):88s, 2004.
30. Coombes RC, Hall E, Gibson LJ, et al:
A randomised trial of exemestane after two or
three years of tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal
women with primary breast cancer. N
Engl J Med 350:1081-1092, 2004.
31. Coombes RC, Hall E, Snowdon CF, et
al: The Intergroup Exemestane Study: A randomized
trial in postmenopausal patients with
early breast cancer who remain disease-free
after two to three years of tamoxifen-updated
survival analysis (abstract 3). Breast Cancer Res
Treat 88(suppl 1):S7, 2004.
32. Jakesz R, Kaufmann M, Gnant M, et al:
Benefits of switching postmenopausal women
with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer to
anastrozole after 2 years adjuvant tamoxifen:
Combined results from 3,123 women enrolled
in the ABCSG Trial 8 and the ARNO 95 Trial
(abstract 2). Breast Cancer Res Treat 88(suppl
1):S7, 2004.
33. Thurlimann BJ, Keshaviah A, Mouridsen
H, et al: BIG 1-98: Randomized double blind
phase III study to evaluate letrozole (L) vs
tamoxifen (T) as adjuvant endocrine therapy for
postmenopausal women with receptor-positive
breast cancer (abstract 511). Proc Am Soc Clin
Oncol 23:6s, 2005.
34. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D,
et al: Anastrozole appears to be superior to
tamoxifen in women already receiving adjuvant
tamoxifen treatment (abstract 3). Breast Cancer
Res Treat 82:S6, 2003.
35. Winer EP, Hudis C, Burnstein HJ, et al:
American Society of Clinical Oncology technology
assessment on the use of aromatase inhibitors
as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal
women with hormone receptor-positive breast
cancer: Status report 2004. J Clin Oncol 23:619-
629, 2005.
36. McDonald CC, Alexander FE, Whyte
BW, et al: Cardiac and vascular morbidity in
women receiving adjuvant tamoxifen for breast
cancer in a randomised trial. The Scottish Cancer
Trials Breast Group. Br Med J 311:977-980,
1995.
37. Costantino JP, Kuller LH, Ives DG, et
al: Coronary heart disease mortality and adjuvant
tamoxifen therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst
89:776-782, 1997.
38. Rutqvist LE, Mattsson A: Cardiac and
thromboembolic morbidity among postmenopausal
women with early-stage breast cancer
in a randomized trial of adjuvant tamoxifen. The
Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group. J Natl
Cancer Inst 85:1398-1406, 1993.
39. Burstein HJ, Winer EP, Kuntz KM, et
al: Optimizing endocrine therapy in postmenopausal
women with early stage breast cancer:
A decision analysis for biological subsets of
tumors (abstract 259). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol
23:11s, 2005.
40. Cuzick J, Howell A: Optimal timing of
the use of an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant
treatment of postmenopausal hormone receptor-
positive breast cancer (abstract 658).
Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 23:43s, 2005.
|
|
Cancer Types
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supportive Care
|
More Topics
|
|
|
|
All Topics 
Five Steps to Improving Patient Access Judy Capko, May 21, 2013 Patient access is getting increased attention through reform initiatives. Here are five steps you can take to make sure patients get appropriate access to care in your office.
|