In the management of patients with metastatic breast cancer, paclitaxel
(Taxol) has demonstrated safety and significant antitumor activity.[1-5]
To fully characterize the drug's potential in the treatment of advanced
breast cancer, we have conducted a series of phase II clinical trials evaluating
its efficacy and tolerability as single-agent therapy (Table
Paclitaxel has been studied in various doses and schedules among patients
with metastases who have not received previous chemotherapy for advanced
disease, as well as among those who have had moderate and extensive prior
therapy.[1,3-5] In heavily pretreated patients, we have conducted a formal
parallel investigation of quality-of-life (QOL) parameters to better assess
the palliative potential of paclitaxel among patients who receive this
agent with the primary intent of symptom control. We are presently incorporating
these variables into a prospective study that addresses economic (charges/costs)
and QOL outcomes, in addition to classic tumor response and toxicity assessments,
in patients receiving single-agent paclitaxel.
Our studies were influenced by preclinical data demonstrating schedule-dependent
cytokinetic variability in resistance profiles to the taxanes,[8-10] as
well as clinical documentation of the efficacy and safety of a 96-hour
infusion schedule against anthracycline-refractory breast cancer. These
investigations led us to perform a phase II and pharmacologic trial assessing
the activity and toxicity profile of this prolonged infusion schedule in
patients with documented progression of disease during shorter taxane exposure.
Data supporting the feasibility and efficacy of more frequent, shorter-duration
taxane infusions has motivated our ongoing trial, which is evaluating
a weekly 1-hour infusion paclitaxel schedule in patients who have received
one or two prior regimens for breast cancer (including adjuvant therapy).
Collaborative laboratory investigations aimed at characterizing clinically
relevant mechanisms of resistance to paclitaxel are well underway in studies
involving biopsied human breast cancer tissue.
Combinations of paclitaxel and other cytotoxic agents are being studied.
A variety of two- and three-drug paclitaxel-containing regimens are in
clinical trials to define possible synergism, as well as to illuminate
safety profiles. At Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), we
have investigated the combination of paclitaxel and edatrexate, a dihydrofolate
reductase inhibitor with preclinical advantages over methotrexate and
proven single-agent activity against metastatic breast cancer.[16-17] The
trial design derives from schedule-dependent synergy observed in vitro
in mammary carcinoma cells.[18,19]
A promising avenue of translational research pertains to the observed
synergy between paclitaxel and monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) directed at
various growth factor receptors in human breast carcinoma xenografts.[20,21]
While laboratory studies addressing possible cellular mechanisms for this
effect are ongoing, we are conducting a clinical trial combining paclitaxel
with a MoAb directed against the epidermal growth factor.
The preserved activity of paclitaxel after anthracycline threapy has
stimulated its evaluation as a component of an adjuvant sequential chemotherapy
regimen for node-positive stage II-III resectable breast cancer. We
recently evaluated the optimal integration of paclitaxel into doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide
(Cytoxan, Neosar)-based adjuvant therapy in a randomized clinical trial.
This article will review 6 years of experience with paclitaxel in the
treatment of breast cancer at MSKCC and describe ongoing and planned studies.
Subsequent to the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center report of the promising
antitumor activity of paclitaxel against metastatic breast cancer, we
performed a confirmatory phase II trial of the agent as first-line chemotherapy
for stage IV disease. In this study, 28 patients who had not received
prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were treated with paclitaxel,
250 mg/m² via a 24-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Because the first
two patients we treated on this protocol experienced significant myelosuppression
(which was dose-limiting in the previous trial), the protocol was amended
so that all subsequent patients received prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating
factor (G-CSF [Neupogen]), 5 µg/kg/d subcutaneously, on days 3 to
10 of each cycle.
A 62% response rate (95% confidence interval [CI], 41% to 80%) was noted,
including three complete responses. Responses were as common among women
who had received prior adjuvant therapy, including doxorubicin-containing
regimens, as among those who had not. Treatment was well tolerate; adverse
effects included generalized alopecia in all patients, and grade 3 or 4
nonhematologic toxicities were uncommon. Of 178 cycles administered, there
were 8 admissions (4%) for febrile neutropenia, involving 6 (21%) of 28
Administration of recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor
(rh-G-CSF) resulted in a median duration with an absolute neutrophil count
less than 500 cells/µL of 2 days, which was shorter than that previously
reported (7 days) without concomitant growth factor support. Fifty-eight
percent of cycles were delivered at modestly reduced doses, primarily due
to significant neutropenia or febrile neutropenia. Because drug supply
was a consideration at this time in the agent's development, the clinical
trial design specified the length of treatment to be two cycles beyond
the best response, with a maximum of 10 cycles per patient. Thus, response
duration was not a valid end point of this trial.
After Prior Chemotherapy
Following this confirmation of paclitaxel's marked antitumor activity
in patients with minimal prior therapy, we evaluated patients who had received
extensive prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Fifty-one
patients who had previously received two or more prior chemotherapy regimens
for metastatic disease (median number of regimens, three; range, two to
six; all with prior anthracycline therapy) entered our second phase II
The median Karnofsky performance score (KPS) for these patients was
70% (range, 60% to 90%). Fourteen percent had received prior high-dose
chemotherapy regimens sufficiently myelotoxic as to require the reinfusion
of autologous bone marrow and/or peripheral blood progenitor cells; two-thirds
of these patients had received radiotherapy for metastatic disease. Paclitaxel
was administered at 200 mg/m² (a lower starting dose was chosen in
anticipation of significant toxicity in these more heavily pretreated patients)
via a 24-hour infusion every 3 weeks with G-CSF, as previously described.
Partial responses were observed in 14 patients (27.5%; 95% CI, 16% to
42%), with a median response duration of 7 months. Hospitalization for
febrile neutropenia occurred in 24 (8%) of the first 312 cycles and in
9 (18%) of 51 patients. No patient was removed from the trial due to toxicity.
Our next trial evaluated the higher 250-mg/m² dose, again via a
24 hour infusion every 3 weeks, in patients who had received only one prior
chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease (with or without prior adjuvant
therapy). Nine partial and two complete responses were noted among 25
evaluable patients (44%; 95% CI, 24% to 65%).
Significantly, in this and the previous trial, prior demonstrated sensitivity
or resistance to an anthracycline did not predict the likelihood of subsequent
response to paclitaxel. This lack of significant clinical cross-resistance
between paclitaxel and doxorubicin, an observation corroborated by others,
was particularly gratifying because preclinical data suggest significant
in vitro cross-resistance between paclitaxel and other agents for which
p-glycoprotein-mediated multidrug resistance is considered relevant.[24,25]
These observations have motivated our ongoing studies characterizing
pre- and post-paclitaxel human tumor tissue biopsies for mdr expression,
tubulin alterations, and genomic changes. It is hoped that such studies
will expand the understanding of clinically relevant mechanisms of taxane
resistance, which may then guide the development of efficient strategies
to overcome resistance and, potentially, the development of superior analogs.
Shorter Infusion Schedule
Renewed interest in the shorter, more convenient 3-hour infusion schedule
coincided with our next two phase II trials, which addressed the safety
and efficacy of this schedule as salvage chemotherapy in heavily treated
patients and as initial chemotherapy for stage IV disease. In the previously
treated patients (two or more prior regimens for metastatic disease, including
an anthracycline), paclitaxel was administered at a starting dose of 175
mg/m² via a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Since 3-hour infusions
are associated with less significant myelosuppression than 24-hour infusions,
G-CSF was not administered prophylactically.
Sixty-four percent of the patients had predominantly visceral disease,
and the median KPS was 70%. After the 111 cycles were delivered (median,
3; range, 1 to 8), five partial responses were observed in 24 evaluable
patients (20.8%; 95% CI, 7% to 42%), with a median response duration
of 4 months (range, 2 to 11 months).
Paclitaxel treatment was well tolerated; the only grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic
toxicities noted were myalgia (4%) and mucositis (4%). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia
was seen in one-third of patients, grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia in 8%,
and grade 3 or 4 anemia in 13%. Dose reduction was required in 21% of patients,
and dose escalation was possible in only 4%.
We then evaluated a 250-mg/m² dose administered via a 3-hour infusion,
again without prophylactic G-CSF, as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic
breast cancer. Among 25 evaluable patients,1 complete and 7 partial responses
were noted (32%; 95% CI, 15% to 53%).
Myalgias, arthralgias, and neuropathy appeared to be more significant
than in our prior experience with this dose delivered over 24 hours to
a similar group of patients. Several patients experienced photopsia
at paclitaxel doses of 250 mg/m² or more over 3 hours, a phenomenon
that may represent an optic neuropathy. These trials provided pilot
data for the design of ongoing randomized trials by the Cancer and Leukemia
Group B (CALGB) and National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project
Additional Effects of Prolonged Treatment
In the course of these trials, it became obvious to us that many patients
experiencing symptomatic relief of bone pain and radiographic healing of
osteolytic metastases on plain x-rays, CT, or MRI had transient worsening
on nuclear scintigraphic evaluation of the skeleton. This radiographic
"flare" on bone scan was followed by further clinical improvement
in skeletal pain and recalcification of destructive bone lesions in one-third
Another phenomenon became apparent with prolonged paclitaxel treatment
(in some cases, beyond 20 courses). Among a series of 52 patients experiencing
continued response of visceral, osseous, and soft-tissue metastases during
paclitaxel treatment, 6 experienced disease progression in the central
nervous system in the absence of other evidence of treatment failure. This
manifested as both parenchymal brain metastases and leptomeningeal disease.
Thus, the central nervous system does appear to be a sanctuary site in
many women receiving paclitaxel for the management of metastatic breast
Our next phase II clinical and pharmacologic trial was motivated by
in vitro data showing less resistance to paclitaxel in p-glycoprotein-overexpressing
MCF-7 breast cancer cells with longer drug exposure time. Further support
of this phenomenon came from other preclinical studies[9,10,30,31] and
encouraging clinical experience with prolonged paclitaxel infusion in patients
with anthracycline-resistant breast cancer.
In this study, we evaluated the possibility of schedule-dependent activity
by administering paclitaxel via a 96-hour continuous infusion specifically
to patients with disease that had demonstrated clinical resistance to short
taxane exposure. A total of 27 such patients with disease progression
had recently received 3-hour paclitaxel (N = 24), 1-hour docetaxel (Taxotere;
N = 2), or both (N = 1). Per protocol, all patients received paclitaxel
via a 96-hour infusion at 140 mg/m² (35 mg/m²/d ×4), with
a starting dose of 120 mg/m²/d for patients with impaired hepatic
function. Because early data had suggested that the omission of steroid
and H1- and H2-receptor antagonist premedication was not associated with
significant hypersensitivity-like reactions with this dose and schedule,
these drugs were not given in our study.
With 195 cycles administered, seven partial responses were noted in
26 evaluable patients (26.9%; 95% CI, 11.6% to 47.8%), with acceptable
hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity. Despite the omission of standard
premedication, no cases of hypersensitivity-like reactions occurred. This
suggests that the slower rate of exposure to paclitaxel--and possibly to
the polyoxyethylated castor oil (Cremophor EL) formulation--may not precipitate
mast-cell degranulation and other cellular phenomena associated with hypersensitivity
Serum paclitaxel concentrations were assayed in 23 patients by high-performance
liquid chromatography at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours of the infusion. The
median steady-state paclitaxel concentration (Css) was .047 µM (range,
.023 to .176 µM). For 11 patients experiencing grade 4 neutropenia,
median Css was .068 µM (range, .032 to .176 µM), as compared
with .039 µM (.023 to .098 µM) in 12 patients with less severe
neutropenia (P less than .05). Median Css and absolute neutrophil count
(ANC) nadirs were .094 µM (range, .074 to .176 µM) and 300
cells/mm³, respectively, in four patients with baseline elevation
of hepatic transaminases vs .041 µM (.023 to .102 µM) and 800
cells/mm³ in 19 patients with normal transaminases (Css, P less than
.01; ANC, not significant).
No relationship between steady-state level and tumor response was noted
with this limited sample size. To further define the significance of infusion
duration for paclitaxel, a recently completed multi-institution trial led
by the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center randomized patients with refractory
metastatic breast cancer to receive paclitaxel via either a 3- or 96-hour
infusion schedule. It is noteworthy that there are greater pharmacologic
differences between the 3- and 96-hour infusion schedules than between
the 3- and 24-hour schedules, and many preclinical data suggest the importance
of paclitaxel exposure duration in breast carcinoma cells. Thus, this trial
should provide the most definitive information about the impact of paclitaxel
infusion duration on efficacy and toxicity.
1. Seidman AD: The emerging role of paclitaxel in breast cancer therapy.
Clin Cancer Res 3:247-256, 1995.
2. Holmes FA, Walters RS, Theriault RL, et al: Phase II trial of Taxol:
An active drug in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer
Inst 83:1797-1805, 1991.
3. Reichman BS, Seidman AD, Crown JPA, et al: Taxol and recombinant
human granulocyte colony stimulating factor as initial therapy for metastatic
breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 11:1943-1951, 1993.
4. Seidman AD, Reichman BS, Crown JPA, et al: Paclitaxel as second and
subsequent therapy for metastatic breast cancer: Activity independent of
prior anthracycline response. J Clin Oncol 13:1152-1159, 1995.
5. Seidman AD, Tiersten A, Hudis C, et al: Phase II trial of paclitaxel
by three-hour infusion as salvage chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol 13:2575-2581, 1995.
6. Seidman AD, Portenoy R, Yao T-J, et al: Quality of life in phase
II trials: A study of methodology and predictive value in patients with
advanced breast cancer treated with paclitaxel plus granulocyte colony-stimulating
factor. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1316-1322, 1995.
7. Seidman AD, Weinstock N, Yao T-J, et al: Outcomes assessment among
patients receiving chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (abstract
EL07). Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Anticancer Treatment,
Paris, France, 1997.
8. Zhan Z, Kang Y-K, Regis J, et al: Taxol resistance: In vitro and
in vivo studies in breast cancer and lymphoma. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res
9. Lopes NK, Adams EG, Pitts TW, et al: Cell kinetics and cell cycle
effects of Taxol on human and hamster ovarian cell lines. Cancer Chemother
Pharmacol 32:235-242, 1993.
10. Liebmann JE, Cook JA, Lipschultz D, et al: Cytotoxic studies of
paclitaxel (Taxol) in human tumor cell lines. Br J Cancer 68:1104-1109,
11. Wilson WH, Berg S, Bryant G, et al: Paclitaxel in doxorubicin-refractory
or mitoxantrone-refractory breast cancer: A phase I/II trial of 96 hour
infusion. J Clin Oncol 12:1621-1629, 1994.
12. Seidman AD, Hochhauser D, Gollub M, et al: 96 Hour paclitaxel after
progression during short taxane exposure: A phase III pharmacokinetic and
pharmacodynamic study in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 14:1877-1884,
13. Klaassen U, Wilke I-L, Strumberg D, et al: Phase I study with a
weekly 1-h infusion of paclitaxel, in heavily pretreated patients with
metastatic breast and ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer 32A:547-549, 1996.
14. McCaffrey JA, Seidman AD, Tong W, et al: A phase II and pharmacologic
study of Taxol by weekly one-hour infusion in the treatment of patients
with metastatic breast cancer (abstract). Breast Cancer Res Treat 41(3):234,
15. Schmid FA, Sirotnak FM, Otter GM, et al: New folate analogs of the
10-deazaaminoptefin series: Markedly increased antitumor activity of the
10-ethyl analog compared to the parent compound and methotrexate against
some human tumor xenografts in nude mice. Cancer Treat Rep 69:551-553,
16. Vandenberg TA, Pritchard KI, Eisenhauer EA, et al: Phase II study
of weekly edatrexate as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer:
A National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group study. J Clin
Oncol 11:1241-1244, 1993.
17. Schornagel JR, van der Vegt S, de Graeff A, et al: Phase II study
of edatrexate in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Ann Oncol 3:549-552, 1992.
18. Chou T-C, Otter GM, Sirotnak FM: Schedule-dependent synergism of
Taxol or Taxotere with edatrexate against human breast cancer cells in
vitro. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 37:222-228, 1996.
19. Fennelly DM, Rigas JR, Chou D, et al: Phase I trial of edotrexate
plus paclitaxel using an administration schedule with demonstrated in vitro
synergy. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 13:365, 1994.
20. Baselga J, Norton L, Masui R, et al: Antitumor effects of doxorubicin
in combination with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies.
J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1327-1333, 1993.
21. Baselga J, Norton L, Coplan K, et al: Antitumor activity of paclitaxel
in combination with anti-growth factor receptor antibodies in breast cancer
xenografts. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 35:380, 1994.
22. Hudis CA, Seidman AD, Baselga J, et al: Sequential adjuvant therapy
with doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide for resectable breast
cancer involving four or more axillary nodes. Semin Oncol 22(6;suppl 15):18-23,
23. Hudis C, Seidman A, Raptis G, et al: Sequential paclitaxel (T) ->
cyclophosphamide (C) is less toxic than concurrent T+C after dose dense
doxorubicin as adjuvant therapy in resected node-positive breast cancer.
Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 15:119, 1996.
24. Roy SN, Horwitz SB: A phosphoglycoprotein associated with Taxol
resistance in J774.2 cells. Cancer Res 45:3856-3863, 1985.
25. Kirschener LS, Greenberger LM, Hong Hsu SI, et al: Biochemical and
genetic characterization of the multidrug resistant phenotype in murine
macrophage-like J774.2 cells. Biochem Pharmacol 43:77-87, 1992.
26. Seidman AD, Barrett S, Canezo S, et al: Photopsia during 3-hour
paclitaxel administration at doses more than 250 mg/m² (letter). J
Clin Oncol 12:1741-1742, 1994.
27. Capri G, Munzone E, Tarenzi E, et al: Optic nerve disturbances:
A new form of paclitaxel neurotoxicity. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1099-1101,
28. Schneider JA, Divgi CR, Scott AM, et al: Flare on bone scintigraphy
following Taxol chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Nucl Med 35:1748-1752,
29. Freilich RJ, Seidman AD, DeAngelis LK, et al: Central nervous system
progression of metastatic breast cancer in patients treated with paclitaxel.
Cancer 76:232-236, 1995.
30. Kelland LR, Abel G: Comparative in vitro cytotoxicity of Taxol and
Taxotere against cisplatin-sensitive and -resistant human ovarian carcinoma
cell lines. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 30:444-450, 1992.
31. Georgiadis MS, Russell E, Johnson BE, et al: Prolonging the exposure
of human lung cancer cell lines to paclitaxel improves the cytotoxicity.
Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 35:341, 1994.
32. Hainsworth JD, Raefsky EL, Thomas K, et al: Paclitaxel administered
by 1-hour infusion: Phase I/II study comparing two schedules of administration.
Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 14:376, 1995.
33. Loeffler TK, Freund W, Lipke J, et al: Schedule and dose intensified
paclitaxel as weekly 1-hour infusion: Evidence for an improved toxicity
profile and response activity in pretreated solid tumors. Proc Am Soc Clin
Oncol 14:1522, 1995.
34. Fennelly D, Shapiro F, Spriggs D, et al: Phase I and pharmacologic
study of paclitaxel administered weekly in patients with relapsed ovarian
cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:187-192, 1997.
35. Klauber N, Parangi S, Flynn E, et al: Inhibition of angiogenesis
and breast cancer in mice by the microtubule inhibitors 2-methoxyestradiol
and Taxol. Cancer Res 57:81-86, 1997.
36. Portenoy RK, Thaler H, Kornblith AB, et al: The Memorial Symptom
Assessment Scale: An instrument for the evaluation of symptom prevalence,
characteristics, and distress. Eur J Cancer 30A:1326-1336, 1994.
37. Schipper H, Clinch J, McMurray A, et al: Measuring the quality of
life of cancer patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development
and validation. J Clin Oncol 2:472-483, 1984.
38. Ingham J, Seidman A, Yao T-J, et al: An exploratory study of frequent
pain measurement in a cancer clinical trial. Quality of Life Res 5:503-507,
39. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, et al. The Functional Assessment of
Cancer Therapy Scale: Development and validation of the general measure.
J Clin Oncol 11:570-579, 1993.
40. Amadori D, Frassineti GL, Zoli W, et al: A Phase I/II study of paclitaxel
and doxorubicin in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Semin Oncol
23(suppl 1):19-23, 1996.
41. Dombernovsky P, Gehl J, Boesgaard M, et al: Paclitaxel and doxorubicin,
a highly active combination in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer.
Semin Oncol 23(suppl 1):13-18, 1996.
42. Luck H-J, Thomssen C, duBois A, et al: Interim analysis of a phase
II study of epirubicin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients
with metastatic breast cancer. Semin Oncol 23(suppl 1):33-36, 1996.
43. Fisherman J, Cowan KH, Noone M, et al: Phase I/II study of 72-hour
infusional paclitaxel and doxorubicin with granulocyte colony-stimulating
factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 14:774-782,
44. Holmes FA, Valero V, Walters RS, et al: The M. D. Anderson Cancer
Center experience with Taxol in metastatic breast cancer. Monogr Natl Cancer
Inst 15:161-169, 1993.
45. Gianni L, Munzone E, Capri G, et al: Paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion
in combination with doxorubicin in women with untreated metastatic breast
cancer: High antitumor efficacy and cardiac effects in a dose-finding and
sequence-finding study. J Clin Oncol 13:2688-2699, 1995.
46. Gelmon KA, O'Reilly S, Plederleith IH, et al: Bi-weekly paclitaxel
and cisplatin in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc
Clin Oncol 13:71, 1994.
47. Wasserheit C, Alter R, Speyer J, et al: Phase II trial of paclitaxel
and cisplatin in women with metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin
Oncol 13:100, 1994.
48. Fennelly D, Gilewski, Hudis C, et al: Phase I trial of sequential
edatrexate followed by paclitaxel: A design based on in vitro synergy in
patients with advanced breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 14:101, 1995.
49. Norton L: Implications of kinetic heterogeneity in clinical oncology.
Semin Oncol 12:231, 1985.
50. Vahdat L, Raptis G, Fennelly D, et al: Rapidly cycled courses of
high-dose alkylating agents supported by filgrastim and peripheral blood
progenitor cells in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer
Res 1:1267-1273, 1995.
51. Fennelly D, Schneider J, Spriggs D, et al: Dose escalation of paclitaxel
with high-dose cyclophosphamide, with analysis of progenitor-cell mobilization
and hematologic support of advanced ovarian cancer patients receiving rapidly
sequenced high-dose carboplatin/cyclophosphamide courses. J Clin Oncol
52. Mendelsohn J, Baselga J: Antibodies to growth factors and receptors,
in De Vita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds): Biologic Therapy of Cancer,
pp 607-624. Philadelphia, JB Lippincott, 1995.
53. Baselga J, Tripathy D, Mendelsohn J, et al: Phase II study of weekly
intravenous recombinant humanized anti-p 185HER2 monoclonal antibody in
patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin
Oncol 14:737-744, 1996.
54. Fan Z, Baselga J, Masui H, et al: Antitumor effect of anti-epidermal
growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies plus cis-diamine- dichloroplatinum
on well established A431 cell xenografts. Cancer Res 53:4637-4642, 1993.
55. Arteaga CL, Dugger TC, Winnier AR: Antiepidermal growth factor receptor
(EGFR) monoclonal antibodies sensitize human carcinoma cells to etoposide
and restore etoposide sensitivity in drug resistant carcinoma cells in
culture. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 12:125, 1994.
56. Blagosklonny W, Schulte T, Nguyen P, et al: Taxol-induced apoptosis
and phosphorylation of bcl-2 protein involves c-raf-1 and represents a
novel c-raf-1 signal transduction pathway. Cancer Res 56:1851-1854, 1997.
57. Tsai C-M, Chang K-T, Wu L-H, et al: Correlations between intrinsic
chemoresistance and HER-2/neu gene expression, p53 gene mutations,
and cell proliferation characteristics in non-small cell lung cancer cell
lines. Cancer Res 56:206-209, 1996.
58. Muss HB, Thor AD, Berry DA, et al:C-erbB-2 expression and response
to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast cancer. N
Engl J Med 330:1260-1266, 1994.
59. Seidman AD, Baselga J, Yao T-J, et al: HER-2/neu over-expression
and clinical taxane sensitivity: A multivariate analysis in patients with
metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 15:104, 1996.
60. Haldar S, Basu A, Croce CM: Bcl2 is the guardian of microtubule
integrity. Cancer Res 57:229-233, 1997.
61. Bonadonna G, Zambetti M, Valagussa P: Sequential or alternating
doxorubicin and CMF regimens in breast cancer with more than three positive
nodes. JAMA 273:542-547, 1995.
62. Hudis C, Lebwohl D, Crown J, et al: Dose intensive sequential crossover
adjuvant chemotherapy for women with high risk node positive primary breast
cancer, in Salmon S (ed): Adjuvant Therapy of Cancer VII, pp 214-219.