Real-World Adjuvant TAC or FEC-D for HER2-Negative Node-Positive Breast Cancer in Women Less Than 50 Years of Age
Authors:
Open Access
- 1 June 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by MDPI AG in Current Oncology
- Vol. 23 (3) , 164-170
Abstract
Purpose: We compared the efficacy, toxicity, and use of granulocyte colony–stimulating factor (g-csf) with tac (docetaxel–doxorubicin–cyclophosphamide) and fec-d (5-fluorouracil–epirubicin–cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel) in women less than 50 years of age. Methods: The study included all women more than 18 years but less than 50 years of age with her2-negative, node-positive, stage ii or iii breast cancer diagnosed in Alberta between 2008 and 2012 who received tac (n = 198) or fec-d (n = 274). Results: The patient groups were well-balanced, except that radiotherapy use was higher in the tac group (91.9% vs. 79.9%, p < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 49.6 months, disease-free survival was 91.4% for tac and 92.0% for fec-d (p = 0.76). Overall survival (os) was 96% with tac and 95.3% with fec-d (p = 0.86).The incidences of grades 3 and 4 toxicities were similar in the two groups (all p > 0.05). Overall, febrile neutropenia (fn) was reported in 11.6% of tac patients and 15.7% of fec-d patients (p = 0.26). However, use of g-csf was higher in the tac group than in the fec-d group (96.4% vs. 71.5%, p < 0.001). Hospitalization for fn was required in 10.5% of tac patients and 13.0% of fec-d patients (p = 0.41). In g-csf–supported and –unsupported patients receiving tac, fn occurred at rates of 11.1% and 33.3% respectively (p = 0.08); in patients receiving the fec portion of fec-d, those proportions were 2.9% and 8.1% respectively (p = 0.24); and in patients receiving docetaxel after fec, the proportions were 4.1% and 17.6% respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In women less than 50 years of age receiving adjuvant tac or fec-d, we observed no differences in efficacy or other nonhematologic toxicities. Based on the timing and rates of fn, use of prophylactic g-csf should be routine for the docetaxel-containing portion of treatment; however, prophylactic g-csf could potentially be avoided during the fec portion of fec-d treatment.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-upAnnals of Oncology, 2013
- Adjuvant docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in node-positive breast cancer: 10-year follow-up of the phase 3 randomised BCIRG 001 trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2013
- Phase III Study of Doxorubicin/Cyclophosphamide With Concomitant Versus Sequential Docetaxel As Adjuvant Treatment in Patients With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Normal, Node-Positive Breast Cancer: BCIRG-005 TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2011
- Cardiotoxicity of anticancer treatments: what the cardiologist needs to knowNature Reviews Cardiology, 2010
- Longer Therapy, Iatrogenic Amenorrhea, and Survival in Early Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2010
- Randomized Phase 3 Trial of Fluorouracil, Epirubicin, and Cyclophosphamide Alone or Followed by Paclitaxel for Early Breast CancerJNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2008
- Sequential Adjuvant Epirubicin-Based and Docetaxel Chemotherapy for Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: The FNCLCC PACS 01 TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2006
- Adjuvant Docetaxel for Node-Positive Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trialsThe Lancet, 2005
- Combination Chemotherapy as an Adjuvant Treatment in Operable Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 1976