Summary Background The optimum endocrine treatment for postmenopausal women with advanced hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer that has progressed on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs) is ...unclear. The aim of the SoFEA trial was to assess a maximum double endocrine targeting approach with the steroidal anti-oestrogen fulvestrant in combination with continued oestrogen deprivation. Methods In a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial done in the UK and South Korea, postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer (oestrogen receptor ER positive, progesterone receptor PR positive, or both) were eligible if they had relapsed or progressed with locally advanced or metastatic disease on an NSAI (given as adjuvant for at least 12 months or as first-line treatment for at least 6 months). Additionally, patients had to have adequate organ function and a WHO performance status of 0–2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular injection on day 1, followed by 250 mg doses on days 15 and 29, and then every 28 days) plus daily oral anastrozole (1 mg); fulvestrant plus anastrozole-matched placebo; or daily oral exemestane (25 mg). Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted blocks, and stratification was by centre and previous use of an NSAI as adjuvant treatment or for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Participants and investigators were aware of assignment to fulvestrant or exemestane, but not of assignment to anastrozole or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , numbers NCT00253422 (UK) and NCT00944918 (South Korea). Findings Between March 26, 2004, and Aug 6, 2010, 723 patients underwent randomisation: 243 were assigned to receive fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 231 to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 249 to exemestane. Median PFS was 4·4 months (95% CI 3·4–5·4) in patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 4·8 months (3·6–5·5) in those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 3·4 months (3·0–4·6) in those assigned to exemestane. No difference was recorded between the patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole and fulvestrant plus placebo (hazard ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·83–1·21; log-rank p=0·98), or between those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo and exemestane (0·95, 0·79–1·14; log-rank p=0·56). 87 serious adverse events were reported: 36 in patients assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole, 22 in those assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo, and 29 in those assigned to exemestane. Grade 3–4 adverse events were rare; the most frequent were arthralgia (three in the group assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole; seven in that assigned to fulvestrant plus placebo; eight in that assigned to exemestane), lethargy (three; 11; 11), and nausea or vomiting (five; two; eight). Interpretation After loss of response to NSAIs in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, maximum double endocrine treatment with 250 mg fulvestrant combined with oestrogen deprivation is no better than either fulvestrant alone or exemestane. Funding Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca.
Summary Background The tAnGo trial was designed to investigate the potential role of gemcitabine when added to anthracycline and taxane-containing adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. When ...this study was developed, gemcitabine had shown significant activity in metastatic breast cancer, and there was evidence of a favourable interaction with paclitaxel. Methods tAnGo was an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 superiority trial that enrolled women aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed, early-stage breast cancer who had a definite indication for chemotherapy, any nodal status, any hormone receptor status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Women were recruited from 127 clinical centres and hospitals in the UK and Ireland, and randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatment regimens: epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (four cycles of 90 mg/m2 intravenously administered epirubicin and 600 mg/m2 intravenously administered cyclophosphamide on day 1 every 3 weeks, followed by four cycles of 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel as a 3 h infusion on day 1 every 3 weeks) or epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (the same chemotherapy regimen as the other group, with the addition of 1250 mg/m2 gemcitabine to the paclitaxel cycles, administered intravenously as a 0·5 h infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks). Patients were randomly assigned by a central computerised deterministic minimisation procedure, with stratification by country, age, radiotherapy intent, nodal status, and oestrogen receptor and HER-2 status. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival and the trial aimed to detect 5% differences in 5-year disease-free survival between the treatment groups. Recruitment completed in 2004 and this is the final, intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2004-002927-41), ISRCTN (51146252), and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT00039546 ). Findings Between Aug 22, 2001, and Nov 26, 2004, 3152 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine (gemcitabine group; n=1576) or to epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel (control group; n=1576). 11 patients (six in the gemcitabine group and five in the control group) were ineligible because of pre-existing metastases and were therefore excluded from the analysis. At this protocol-specified final analysis (median follow-up 10 years IQR 10–10), 1087 disease-free survival events and 914 deaths had occurred. Disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the treatment groups at 10 years (65% 63–68 in the gemcitabine group vs 65% 62–67 in the control group), and median disease-free survival was not reached (adjusted hazard ratio 0·97 95% CI 0·86–1·10, p=0·64). Toxicity, dose intensity, and a detailed safety substudy showed both regimens to be safe, deliverable, and tolerable. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported at expected levels in both groups. The most common were neutropenia (527 34% of 1565 patients in the gemcitabine group vs 412 26% of 1567 in the control group), myalgia and arthralgia (207 13% vs 186 12%), fatigue (207 13% vs 152 10%), infection (202 13% vs 141 9%), vomiting (143 9% vs 108 7%), and nausea (132 8% vs 102 7%). Interpretation The addition of gemcitabine to anthracycline and taxane-based adjuvant chemotherapy at this dose and schedule confers no therapeutic advantage in terms of disease-free survival in early breast cancer, although it can cause increased toxicity. Therefore, gemcitabine has not been added to standard adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer for any subgroup. Funding Cancer Research UK core funding for Clinical Trials Unit at the University of Birmingham, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer.
Summary Background Early results of the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent stroke in Intracranial Stenosis trial showed that, by 30 days, 33 (14·7%) of 224 patients ...in the stenting group and 13 (5·8%) of 227 patients in the medical group had died or had a stroke (percentages are product limit estimates), but provided insufficient data to establish whether stenting offered any longer-term benefit. Here we report the long-term outcome of patients in this trial. Methods We randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by centre with randomly permuted block sizes) 451 patients with recent transient ischaemic attack or stroke related to 70–99% stenosis of a major intracranial artery to aggressive medical management (antiplatelet therapy, intensive management of vascular risk factors, and a lifestyle-modification programme) or aggressive medical management plus stenting with the Wingspan stent. The primary endpoint was any of the following: stroke or death within 30 days after enrolment, ischaemic stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days of enrolment, or stroke or death within 30 days after a revascularisation procedure of the qualifying lesion during follow-up. Primary endpoint analysis of between-group differences with log-rank test was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT 00576693. Findings During a median follow-up of 32·4 months, 34 (15%) of 227 patients in the medical group and 52 (23%) of 224 patients in the stenting group had a primary endpoint event. The cumulative probability of the primary endpoints was smaller in the medical group versus the percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) group (p=0·0252). Beyond 30 days, 21 (10%) of 210 patients in the medical group and 19 (10%) of 191 patients in the stenting group had a primary endpoint. The absolute differences in the primary endpoint rates between the two groups were 7·1% at year 1 (95% CI 0·2 to 13·8%; p=0·0428), 6·5% at year 2 (–0·5 to 13·5%; p=0·07) and 9·0% at year 3 (1·5 to 16·5%; p=0·0193). The occurrence of the following adverse events was higher in the PTAS group than in the medical group: any stroke (59 26% of 224 patients vs 42 19% of 227 patients; p=0·0468) and major haemorrhage (29 13%of 224 patients vs 10 4% of 227 patients; p=0·0009). Interpretation The early benefit of aggressive medical management over stenting with the Wingspan stent for high-risk patients with intracranial stenosis persists over extended follow-up. Our findings lend support to the use of aggressive medical management rather than PTAS with the Wingspan system in high-risk patients with atherosclerotic intracranial arterial stenosis. Funding National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and others.
Summary Background Pathological complete response has been proposed as a surrogate endpoint for prediction of long-term clinical benefit, such as disease-free survival, event-free survival (EFS), and ...overall survival (OS). We had four key objectives: to establish the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS, to establish the definition of pathological complete response that correlates best with long-term outcome, to identify the breast cancer subtypes in which pathological complete response is best correlated with long-term outcome, and to assess whether an increase in frequency of pathological complete response between treatment groups predicts improved EFS and OS. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and Medline for clinical trials of neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. To be eligible, studies had to meet three inclusion criteria: include at least 200 patients with primary breast cancer treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery; have available data for pathological complete response, EFS, and OS; and have a median follow-up of at least 3 years. We compared the three most commonly used definitions of pathological complete response—ypT0 ypN0, ypT0/is ypN0, and ypT0/is—for their association with EFS and OS in a responder analysis. We assessed the association between pathological complete response and EFS and OS in various subgroups. Finally, we did a trial-level analysis to assess whether pathological complete response could be used as a surrogate endpoint for EFS or OS. Findings We obtained data from 12 identified international trials and 11 955 patients were included in our responder analysis. Eradication of tumour from both breast and lymph nodes (ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0) was better associated with improved EFS (ypT0 ypN0: hazard ratio HR 0·44, 95% CI 0·39–0·51; ypT0/is ypN0: 0·48, 0·43–0·54) and OS (0·36, 0·30–0·44; 0·36, 0·31–0·42) than was tumour eradication from the breast alone (ypT0/is; EFS: HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·55–0·66; OS 0·51, 0·45–0·58). We used the ypT0/is ypN0 definition for all subsequent analyses. The association between pathological complete response and long-term outcomes was strongest in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (EFS: HR 0·24, 95% CI 0·18–0·33; OS: 0·16, 0·11–0·25) and in those with HER2-positive, hormone-receptor-negative tumours who received trastuzumab (EFS: 0·15, 0·09–0·27; OS: 0·08, 0·03, 0·22). In the trial-level analysis, we recorded little association between increases in frequency of pathological complete response and EFS ( R2 =0·03, 95% CI 0·00–0·25) and OS ( R2 =0·24, 0·00–0·70). Interpretation Patients who attain pathological complete response defined as ypT0 ypN0 or ypT0/is ypN0 have improved survival. The prognostic value is greatest in aggressive tumour subtypes. Our pooled analysis could not validate pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint for improved EFS and OS. Funding US Food and Drug Administration.
Summary Background Neuroprotection with NA-1 (Tat-NR2B9c), an inhibitor of postsynaptic density-95 protein, has been shown in a primate model of stroke. We assessed whether NA-1 could reduce ...ischaemic brain damage in human beings. Methods For this double-blind, randomised, controlled study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older who had a ruptured or unruptured intracranial aneurysm amenable to endovascular repair from 14 hospitals in Canada and the USA. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to allocate patients to receive an intravenous infusion of either NA-1 or saline control at the end of their endovascular procedure (1:1; stratified by site, age, and aneurysm status). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was safety and primary clinical outcomes were the number and volume of new ischaemic strokes defined by MRI at 12–95 h after infusion. We used a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00728182. Findings Between Sept 16, 2008, and March 30, 2011, we randomly allocated 197 patients to treatment—12 individuals did not receive treatment because they were found to be ineligible after randomisation, so the mITT population consisted of 185 individuals, 92 in the NA-1 group and 93 in the placebo group. Two minor adverse events were adjudged to be associated with NA-1; no serious adverse events were attributable to NA-1. We recorded no difference between groups in the volume of lesions by either diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted p value=0·120) or fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (adjusted p value=0·236). Patients in the NA-1 group sustained fewer ischaemic infarcts than did patients in the placebo group, as gauged by diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·38–0·74) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (0·59, 0·42–0·83). Interpretation Our findings suggest that neuroprotection in human ischaemic stroke is possible and that it should be investigated in larger trials. Funding NoNO Inc and Arbor Vita Corp.
Summary Background Trastuzumab has established efficacy against breast cancer with overexpression or amplification of the HER2 oncogene. The standard of care is 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab, but ...the optimum duration of treatment is unknown. We compared 2 years of treatment with trastuzumab with 1 year of treatment, and updated the comparison of 1 year of trastuzumab versus observation at a median follow-up of 8 years, for patients enrolled in the HERceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. Methods The HERA trial is an international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing treatment with trastuzumab for 1 and 2 years with observation after standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, or both in 5102 patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The comparison of 2 years versus 1 year of trastuzumab treatment involved a landmark analysis of 3105 patients who were disease-free 12 months after randomisation to one of the trastuzumab groups, and was planned after observing at least 725 disease-free survival events. The updated intention-to-treat comparison of 1 year trastuzumab treatment versus observation alone in 3399 patients at a median follow-up of 8 years (range 0–10) is also reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00045032. Findings We recorded 367 events of disease-free survival in 1552 patients in the 1 year group and 367 events in 1553 patients in the 2 year group (hazard ratio HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·85–1·14, p=0·86). Grade 3–4 adverse events and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction during treatment were reported more frequently in the 2 year treatment group than in the 1 year group (342 20·4% vs 275 16·3% grade 3–4 adverse events, and 120 7·2% vs 69 4·1% decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction, respectively). HRs for a comparison of 1 year of trastuzumab treatment versus observation were 0·76 (95% CI 0·67–0·86, p<0·0001) for disease-free survival and 0·76 (0·65–0·88, p=0·0005) for overall survival, despite crossover of 884 (52%) patients from the observation group to trastuzumab therapy. Interpretation 2 years of adjuvant trastuzumab is not more effective than is 1 year of treatment for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. 1 year of treatment provides a significant disease-free and overall survival benefit compared with observation and remains the standard of care. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche (Roche).
Summary Background Treatment with adjuvant trastuzumab for 1 year improves disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early ...breast cancer. We aimed to assess disease-free survival and overall survival after a median follow-up of 4 years for patients enrolled on the Herceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. Methods The HERA trial is an international, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing treatment with trastuzumab for 1 and 2 years with observation after standard neoadjuvant, adjuvant chemotherapy, or both in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. After a positive first interim analysis at a median follow-up of 1 year for the comparison of treatment with trastuzumab for 1 year with observation, event-free patients in the observation group were allowed to cross over to receive trastuzumab. We report trial outcomes for the 1-year trastuzumab and observation groups at a median follow-up of 48·4 months (IQR 42·0–56·5) and assess the effect of the extensive crossover to trastuzumab. Our analysis was by intention-to-treat. The HERA trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2005-002385-11. Findings The HERA trial population comprised 1698 patients randomly assigned to the observation group and 1703 to the 1-year trastuzumab group. Intention-to-treat analysis of disease-free survival showed a significant benefit in favour of patients in the 1-year trastuzumab group (4-year disease-free survival 78·6%) compared with the observation group (4-year disease-free survival 72·2%; hazard ratio HR 0·76; 95% CI 0·66–0·87; p<0·0001). Intention-to-treat analysis of overall survival showed no significant difference in the risk of death (4-year overall survival 89·3% vs 87·7%, respectively; HR 0·85; 95% CI 0·70–1·04; p=0·11). Overall, 885 patients (52%) of the 1698 patients in the observation group crossed over to receive trastuzumab, and began treatment at median 22·8 months (range 4·5–52·7) from randomisation. In a non-randomised comparison, patients in the selective-crossover cohort had fewer disease-free survival events than patients remaining in the observation group (adjusted HR 0·68; 95% CI 0·51–0·90; p=0·0077). Higher incidences of grade 3–4 and fatal adverse events were noted on 1-year trastuzumab than in the observation group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events, each in less than 1% of patients, were congestive cardiac failure, hypertension, arthralgia, back pain, central-line infection, hot flush, headache, and diarrhoea. Interpretation Treatment with adjuvant trastuzumab for 1 year after chemotherapy is associated with significant clinical benefit at 4-year median follow-up. The substantial selective crossover of patients in the observation group to trastuzumab was associated with improved outcomes for this cohort. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche, Michelangelo Foundation.
Summary Background The role of adjuvant bisphosphonates in early breast cancer is uncertain. We therefore did a large randomised trial to investigate the effect of the adjuvant use of zoledronic acid ...on disease-free survival (DFS) in high-risk patients with early breast cancer. Methods In the AZURE trial, an open-label, international, multicentre, randomised, controlled, parallel-group phase 3 trial, women (age ≥18 years) with stage II or III breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by a central automated 24-h computer-generated telephone minimisation system (balanced for number of involved axillary lymph nodes, tumour stage, oestrogen receptor status, type and timing of systemic therapy, menopausal status, statin use, and treatment centre) to receive standard adjuvant systemic treatment alone (control group) or with 4 mg intravenous zoledronic acid every 3–4 weeks for six doses, then every 3 months for eight doses, followed by every 6 months for five doses, for a total of 5 years of treatment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints were invasive DFS (IDFS), overall survival, time to bone metastases, time to distant recurrence, and subgroup analyses of variables included in the randomisation. All patients have completed study treatment. Results from the intention-to-treat final analysis of this fully recruited study are presented after a median follow-up of 84 months (IQR 66–93). This final efficacy analysis was planned to take place after 940 DFS events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00072020. Findings 3360 women were recruited from 174 centres in seven countries between Sept 4, 2003, and Feb 16, 2006. The number of DFS events did not differ between groups: 493 in the control group and 473 in the zoledronic acid group (adjusted hazard ratio HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·82–1·06; p=0·30). IDFS (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·82–1·05; p=0·22), overall survival (0·93, 0·81–1·08; p=0·37), and distant recurrences (0·93, 0·81–1·07; p=0·29) were much the same in both groups. Zoledronic acid reduced the development of bone metastases, both as a first event (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·63–0·96; p=0·020) and at any time during follow-up (0·81, 0·68–0·97; p=0·022). The effects of zoledronic acid on DFS were not affected by oestrogen-receptor status. However, zoledronic acid improved IDFS in those who were over 5 years since menopause at trial entry (n=1041; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·63–0·96) but not in all other (premenopause, perimenopause, and unknown status) menopausal groups (n=2318; HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·89–1·20). 33 cases of suspected osteonecrosis of the jaw have been reported, with 26 confirmed on central review, all in the zoledronic acid group (1·7%, 95% CI 1·0–2·4). Interpretation These results suggest no overall benefit from the addition of zoledronic acid to standard adjuvant treatments for early breast cancer. However, zoledronic acid does reduce the development of bone metastases and, for women with established menopause, improved disease outcomes. Funding Novartis Global and NIHR Cancer Research Network.
Summary Background The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improves progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer and pathological complete response rates in the neoadjuvant setting. ...Micrometastases are dependent on angiogenesis, suggesting that patients might benefit from anti-angiogenic strategies in the adjuvant setting. We therefore assessed the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting for women with triple-negative breast cancer. Methods For this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial we recruited patients with centrally confirmed triple-negative operable primary invasive breast cancer from 360 sites in 37 countries. We randomly allocated patients aged 18 years or older (1:1 with block randomisation; stratified by nodal status, chemotherapy with an anthracycline, taxane, or both, hormone receptor status negative vs low, and type of surgery) to receive a minimum of four cycles of chemotherapy either alone or with bevacizumab (equivalent of 5 mg/kg every week for 1 year). The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population, safety analyses were done on all patients who received at least one dose of study drug, and plasma biomarker analyses were done on all treated patients consenting to biomarker analyses and providing a measurable baseline plasma sample. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00528567. Findings Between Dec 3, 2007, and March 8, 2010, we randomly assigned 1290 patients to receive chemotherapy alone and 1301 to receive bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. Most patients received anthracycline-containing therapy; 1638 (63%) of the 2591 patients had node-negative disease. At the time of analysis of IDFS, median follow-up was 31·5 months (IQR 25·6–36·8) in the chemotherapy-alone group and 32·0 months (27·5–36·9) in the bevacizumab group. At the time of the primary analysis, IDFS events had been reported in 205 patients (16%) in the chemotherapy-alone group and in 188 patients (14%) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio HR in stratified log-rank analysis 0·87, 95% CI 0·72–1·07; p=0·18). 3-year IDFS was 82·7% (95% CI 80·5–85·0) with chemotherapy alone and 83·7% (81·4–86·0) with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. After 200 deaths, no difference in overall survival was noted between the groups (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·64–1·12; p=0·23). Exploratory biomarker assessment suggests that patients with high pre-treatment plasma VEGFR-2 might benefit from the addition of bevacizumab (Cox interaction test p=0·029). Use of bevacizumab versus chemotherapy alone was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 or worse hypertension (154 patients 12% vs eight patients 1%), severe cardiac events occurring at any point during the 18-month safety reporting period (19 1% vs two <0·5%), and treatment discontinuation (bevacizumab, chemotherapy, or both; 256 20% vs 30 2%); we recorded no increase in fatal adverse events with bevacizumab (four <0·5% vs three <0·5%). Interpretation Bevacizumab cannot be recommended as adjuvant treatment in unselected patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to assess the potential effect of bevacizumab on overall survival. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Summary Background Adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer has improved outcomes but causes toxicity. The UK TACT2 trial used a 2×2 factorial design to test two hypotheses: whether use of ...accelerated epirubicin would improve time to tumour recurrence (TTR); and whether use of oral capecitabine instead of cyclophosphamide would be non-inferior in terms of patients' outcomes and would improve toxicity, quality of life, or both. Methods In this multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older from 129 UK centres who had histologically confirmed node-positive or high-risk node-negative operable breast cancer, had undergone complete excision, and were due to receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive four cycles of 100 mg/m2 epirubicin either every 3 weeks (standard epirubicin) or every 2 weeks with 6 mg pegfilgrastim on day 2 of each cycle (accelerated epirubicin), followed by four 4-week cycles of either classic cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF; 600 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide intravenously on days 1 and 8 or 100 mg/m2 orally on days 1–14; 40 mg/m2 methotrexate intravenously on days 1 and 8; and 600 mg/m2 fluorouracil intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle) or four 3-week cycles of 2500 mg/m2 capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 given twice daily on days 1–14 of each cycle). The randomisation schedule was computer generated in random permuted blocks, stratified by centre, number of nodes involved (none vs one to three vs four or more), age (≤50 years vs >50 years), and planned endocrine treatment (yes vs no). The primary endpoint was TTR, defined as time from randomisation to first invasive relapse or breast cancer death, with intention-to-treat analysis of standard versus accelerated epirubicin and per-protocol analysis of CMF versus capecitabine. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 68068041, and with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00301925. Findings From Dec 16, 2005, to Dec 5, 2008, 4391 patients (4371 women and 20 men) were recruited. At a median follow-up of 85·6 months (IQR 80·6–95·9) no significant difference was seen in the proportions of patients free from TTR events between the accelerated and standard epirubicin groups (overall hazard ratio HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·81–1·09; stratified p=0·42). At 5 years, 85·9% (95% CI 84·3–87·3) of patients receiving standard epirubicin and 87·1% (85·6–88·4) of those receiving accelerated epirubicin were free from TTR events. 4358 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis, and no difference was seen in the proportions of patients free from TTR events between the CMF and capecitabine groups (HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·85–1.14; stratified p=0·00092 for non-inferiority). Compared with baseline, significantly more patients taking CMF than those taking capecitabine had clinically relevant worsening of quality of life at end of treatment (255 58% of 441 vs 235 50% of 475; p=0·011) and at 12 months (114 34% of 334 vs 89 22% of 401; p<0·001 at 12 months) and had worse quality of life over time (p<0·0001). Detailed toxicity and quality-of-life data were collected from 2115 (48%) of treated patients. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in cycles 1–4 were neutropenia (175 16%) and fatigue (56 5%) of the 1070 patients treated with standard epirubicin, and fatigue (63 6%) and infection (34 3%) of the 1045 patients treated with accelerated epirubicin. In cycles 5–8, the most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were neutropenia (321 31%) and fatigue (109 11%) in the patients treated with CMF, and hand-foot syndrome (129 12%) and diarrhoea (67 6%) in the 1044 patients treated with capcitabine. Interpretation We found no benefit from increasing the dose density of the anthracycline component of chemotherapy. However, capecitabine could be used in place of CMF without significant loss of efficacy and with improved quality of life. Funding Cancer Research UK, Amgen, Pfizer, and Roche.
PDF
