Randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil alone or alternating with a "cycle active" non-cross-resistant combination in women with visceral metastatic breast cancer: a Southeastern Cancer Study Group project. A new six-drug antiblastic regimen (R 14) at low doses (micropolychemotherapy) compared to CMF in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: phase III study. A randomized trial of adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, ftorafur (ACF) and adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, ftorafur, methotrexate (ACFM) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Adriamycin plus vincristine alone or with dibromodulcitol or ICRF-159 in metastatic breast cancer. Chemotherapy versus chemoimmunotherapy (CAF v CAFVP v CMF each +/- MER) for metastatic carcinoma of the breast: a CALGB study. Cancer and Leukemia Group B. An evaluation of the effect of vincristine added to cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, and prednisone in advanced breast cancer. Low dose chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer with cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CAMF) versus sequential cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) and adriamycin. Doxorubicin and CCNU with or without vincristine in patients with advanced refractory breast cancer. A randomized trial. Randomized clinical trial of CFP versus CMFP in women with metastatic breast cancer. Adriamycin plus alkylating agents in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Differential response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor level. Results of a prospective randomized study. Mitozantrone and methotrexate chemotherapy with and without mitomycin C in the treatment of advanced breast cancer: a randomised clinical trial. Adriamycin combinations in advanced breast cancer. A Southwest Oncology Group Study. Randomized trial of 3 different regimens of combination chemotherapy in patients receiving simultaneously a hormonal treatment for advanced breast cancer. Comparison of four-combination chemotherapy programs in metastatic breast cancer: comparison of multiple drug therapy with cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone versus cytoxan and adriamycin, versus cytoxan, 5-FU and adriamycin, versus cytoxan, 5-FU and prednisone alternating with cytoxan and adriamycin. Combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: two regimens containing adriamycin.
Patients with visceral patterns of metastatic breast cancer were stratified according to dominant metastatic site and performance status and then randomized to therapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (CAF) or CAF alternating with a "cell-cycle active" regimen including cytosine arabinoside, methotrexate with leucovorin rescue, and oncovin ( CAMELEON ). One hundred eighty-seven patients were randomized; response rate for CAF was 44% and for CAF + CAMELEON , 40%. Durations of disease control and survival were not significantly different. Toxicity of CAF was as anticipated with predominant granulocytopenia, vomiting, and alopecia. Toxicity of CAMELEON was less severe than that of CAF, and CAF toxicity was not worsened by preceding courses of CAMELEON ; however, the CAF- CAMELEON regimen was cumbersome and complex leading to both physician and patient noncompliance. Contrary to the preliminary results of a pilot study, and preliminary reports of the present trial suggesting benefit for the CAF- CAMELEON regimen the present randomized trial does not confirm any significant benefit of CAF- CAMELEON over CAF alone in patients with visceral metastatic breast cancer although this conclusion must be viewed in light of the high inevaluability rate due to patient and physician noncompliance. Two groups of 23 patients each, having advanced breast cancer, entered this prospective and randomized study. One group was treated with the conventional schedule of CMF (cyclophosphamide 100 mg/m2/po from the first to the 14th day, methotrexate 40 mg/m2/iv the first and the 8th day, 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m2/iv the first and the 8th day), and the other was treated with a new six-drug regimen, administered at low doses (R 14: cyclophosphamide 2 mg/kg/iv, vincristine 0.01 mg/kg/iv, vinblastine 0.1 mg/kg/iv, the first day and 5-fluorouracil 5 mg/kg/iv, methotrexate 0.7 mg/kg/iv, adriamycin 0.5 mg/kg/iv the 2nd day every 21 days). The remission rate was 35% (8/23) and 39% (9/23) for CMF and R 14 respectively. The median duration of objective remission was 6 months for CMF and 5 months for R 14 regimen. The median survival time of responding patients was 18 months for CMF and 14 months for R 14. This study shows that the new six-drug regimen at low doses is effective (regarding subjective, objective response and survival rate), and its toxicity is no higher than that of CMF (the incidence of leukopenia was significantly lower during the first course). Therefore, R 14 should be considered an alternative regimen to CMF in the treatment of advanced and, possibly, early breast cancer. The advantages for using R 14 are: 1) it is less toxic (a single dose is a very small amount of medicine compared to what is usually administered), 2) an iv administration always follows a therapeutic program (while in a CMF schedule cyclophosphamide is self-administered by the patient). A prospective randomized trial was conducted comparing the clinical response of 60 patients with advanced breast cancer to a combination of adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, and oral ftorafur (ACF), or to a combination of ACF plus methotrexate (ACFM). The response rate was 12 of 28 (43%) in ACF and 18 of 30 (60%) in ACFM. Responses were seen more frequently in patients in whom fewer than two organs were involved, and responses at dominant metastatic sites were equal for the two arms. The response duration was 21 + (3.5-49.5+) months with ACF, as against 6.9 (1.9-30.8+) months with ACFM (P less than 0.05). The median survival time from start of therapy was 20.8+ months for ACF, while that for ACFM was 13+ months (statistically not significant). The major toxicities were hair loss, GI toxicity, and leukopenia. The response rate with ACFM was higher than that with ACF, but the addition of methotrexate to ACF did not increase the complete response rate or prolong response duration. A total of 268 patients with metastatic breast cancer were prospectively randomized to receive Adriamycin-vincristine (AV) alone, AV plus dibromodulcitol (AVD), or AV plus ICRF-159 (AVI). Two hundred thirty were eligible and had received prior chemotherapy. The objective response rates were 27%, 23%, and 16% for AV, AVD and AVI, respectively, and an additional 44% had stabilization of disease. Duration of responses ranged from 4.1 to 4.6 months and the times to treatment failure from 2.9 to 3.8 months. Median survivals ranged from 7.1 to 8.3 months. Performance status and the presence of liver or brain metastases were significant prognostic variables for outcome. These studies show that AVI is inferior to AV with respect to survival when prognostic variables are taken into account in a multivariate model, whereas AVD which utilizes a lower dose of Adriamycin appears to have comparable antitumor activity to AV. This does not appear to offer any benefit to patients previously treated with chemotherapy, as in this trial, but it may be an advantage to previously untreated patients since Adriamycin can be administered to responding patients over a longer period of time before an unacceptable total cumulative dose is reached. Three combination chemotherapy regimens each with or without the methanol-extracted residue of bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) (MER) were compared for efficacy. After stratification for disease-free interval and dominant sites of disease, patients were randomized to either CMF (cyclophosphamide [CYC], 100 mg/m2 orally, days 1 through 14; methotrexate [MTX], 40 mg intravenously [IV], days 1 and 8; 5-fluorouracil [5-FU], 500 mg/m2 IV, days 1 and 8), or CAF (CYC, 100 mg/m2 orally, days 1 through 14; doxorubicin [DOX], 25 mg/m2 IV, days 1 and 8; 5-FU, 500 mg/m2 IV, days 1 and 8), or CAFVP (CAF as above plus vincristine [VCR], 1.0 mg/m2 IV, days 1 and 8; and prednisone [PRED], 40 mg/m2 orally, days 1 through 14). Nonspecific immunotherapy with MER was administered in five sites at 100 micrograms or at the lowest tenfold dilution that produced a 1-cm indurated lesion. A total of 432 patients were entered, but 37 were disqualified, leaving 395 evaluable for treatment results and toxicities. One hundred thirty-five evaluable patients were randomized to chemoimmunotherapy until October 28, 1978. One hundred twenty-six evaluable patients were randomized to chemotherapy alone in the same time period. For the entire study, a total of 260 evaluable patients were randomized to chemotherapy. Chemoimmunotherapy patients were compared with the initial 126 chemotherapy patients. Chemotherapy regimens were compared among all 260 patients. Patient characteristics were similar between regimens and between chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy treatment groups. For patients on chemotherapy plus MER, there was no significant differences between the regimens for response frequencies: 43%, 41%, and 32%, respectively for CMF, CAF, and CAFVP. The comparable chemotherapy alone group had 36%, 58%, and 63% response, respectively. The response rates, adjusted for chemotherapy regimen, were 52% and 38% (P = .02) for chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy, respectively. MER was associated with painful ulcers and fevers. Thus, MER produced toxicity without response or survival benefit and further randomization after October 28, 1978 was to chemotherapy alone. For 260 evaluable patients on chemotherapy alone, the complete (CR) and partial responses (PR) were 37%, 55%, and 58%, respectively for CMF, CAF, and CAFVP. These response rates for CAF and CAFVP were significantly better than CMF (P = .01 and P less than .01, respectively). These comparisons were consistent within subgroupings such as dominant sites of disease.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) A multi-institutional randomized clinical trial was carried out to evaluate the effect of vincristine (V) added to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, and prednisone (CMFP) for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. There were 427 patients entered into the study and randomly assigned to one of the two treatments, i.e. the five drug therapy CMFPV or the four drug therapy CMFP. The differences in patient survival and tumor response between the two treatment groups were not statistically significant. The data were also analyzed using multivariate procedures to determine those factors ascertained at entry into the study which were predictors of survival or predictors of response to therapy. The one factor that predicted both response and survival was performance status. An additional important predictor of survival was sites of metastatic involvement. Other significant predictors of response were menopausal age, BUN, and hematocrit. Seventy-eight advanced breast cancer patients with hormone-resistant disease or visceral metastases were randomized to receive either of two low dose regimens consisting of cyclophosphamide (C), methotrexate (M), 5-fluorouracil (F), and Adriamycin (A) as their initial chemotherapy. One group was treated with CAMF, and the other with CMF until progression, followed by A (CMF leads to A). C was given at 50 mg/m2, po, days 1-14; M at 20 mg/m2, F at 300 mg/m2, and A at 20 mg/m2, iv, days 1 and 8 of each 28-day cycle. The response rates for CAMF vs. CMF did not differ significantly (complete and partial responses-62% vs. 49%; stabilizations-23% vs. 31%). Responses by site of metasis, median times to progression and median survivals were similar for both groups. Poor and good risk partial responders had similar survivals. Twelve percent of CMF patients treated with Adriamycin at the time of progression had partial responses with an associated improved survival. Since CMF is as effective as CAMF, but has less toxicity, low dose therapy with CMF is more acceptable than CAMF as an initial chemotherapy regimen for metastatic breast cancer. Adriamycin may be reserved for subsequent regression induction. Thirty-five patients with advanced breast cancer refractory to initial chemotherapy were randomized to receive two-drug doxorubicin-CCNU or three-drug doxorubicin-CCNU-vincristine (VCR) treatment. Doxorubicin (25-40 mg/m2) and VCR (1.4 mg/m2) were given intravenously every 21 days; CCNU (65-90 mg/m2) was given orally every 42 days. Patients with liver or bone marrow metastases initially received the lower range doses. All patients failed prior chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide and 5-FU with or without methotrexate and prednisone; 67% received prior hormonal therapy. Pretreatment patient characteristics were comparable in both groups. Objective responses (greater than 50% reduction in tumor size) were seen in 7 of 18 patients (39%) on the VCR containing arm and in 8 of 17 patients (46%) on the doxorubicin-CCNU arm. Survival was not improved by VCR addition with overall survival on the doxorubicin-CCNU arm, approximately 10% greater at all intervals (median 9.1 versus 7.0 months; not statistically significant). However, neurotoxicity was significantly greater in the VCR arm (36% versus 0%; P less than 0.05). In advanced breast cancer, no benefit to VCR addition was seen in prior randomized studies of first-line combinations where VCR was the treatment variable. Such results, combined with our experience with VCR in a salvage regimen, question the value of VCR addition to combination regimens in advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial was performed to determine relative efficacy and toxicity of two first-line combination chemotherapy regimens in women with metastatic breast cancer: CFP (cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, prednisone) and CMFP (cyclophosphamide, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, prednisone). Both regimens have reported efficacy in this setting but differ in dosages and scheduling of the agents they have in common. Three hundred thirty-six women with no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were eligible and evaluable, and 309 had either measurable or evaluable disease and were assessable for objective response. Responses were seen in 65 of 153 (42%) on CFP and 83 of 156 (53%) on CMFP (two-sided P = 0.06). Median durations of response were 7.1 months for CFP and 8.5 months for CMFP (log-rank, two-sided P = 0.67). Considering all 336 patients, the median times to disease progression were 4.7 months for CFP and 6.2 months for CMFP (log-rank P = 0.31) and median survivals were 15.2 and 14.9 months, respectively (log-rank P = 0.88). Covariate analysis did not alter these findings. Median leukocyte nadirs were 1800 for CFP and 1500 for CMFP, with 22% and 21%, respectively, having nadirs less than 1000/microliters. Emesis was more frequent on CFP (49%) than on CMFP (26%) but was severe in only 7% and 5%, respectively. It is concluded that despite a higher response rate on CMFP and some differences in toxicities including a higher reported incidence of emesis on CFP, there was no substantial difference in efficacy or tolerability between the two regimens. A randomized trial of Adriamycin (A) in combination with melphalan (M), (MA therapy), and in combination with M plus cyclophosphamide (C) (MAC therapy), was initiated in 40 evaluable patients with metastatic breast cancer. Twenty-two patients demonstrated an objective response to therapy: 9/20 to the MA regimen, and 13/20 to the MAC regimen. For the 22 responders, median duration of response is not yet achieved for either complete or partial responders, at 10 and 9 months, respectively. The addition of the two alkylating agents to Adriamycin was superior to the single alkylating agent addition, both in total response rate and in completeness of response. Maintenance therapy, after achieving the maximum cumulative dose of Adriamycin, was provided by cyclophosphamide plus methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). In 19 patients completing induction and entering maintenance therapy, only one relapse has developed with maximun follow-up at 15 months. The predictive value of estrogen receptor (ER) level for response to chemotherapy was studied in 182 patients with metastatic breast cancer in a prospective study. Patients were stratified according to ER status and dominant site of disease and randomized to one of three regimens: cyclophosphamide, 5-Fluorouracil, and prednisone (CFP) versus CFP, methotrexate, and vincristine (CFPMV) versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC). There was no significant differences in all response categories (P = 0.21), was taken as a predictor for response to chemotherapy, there was no significant difference in overall response (P = 0.61) between ER+ (62/108, 57%) and ER- patients (31/49, 63%). However, there was a significant trend toward a higher degree of response in ER- patients (more complete response [CR] nine of 49, 18%, and fewer failures six of 49, 12%) than in ER+ (less CR seven of 108, 7%, and more failures 37/108, 34%) (P = 0.006). Patients with higher measured levels of ER showed worse response (Kendall's tau C, P = 0.026). This trend for ER- patients to have better response than ER+ patients was generally consistent, regardless of the predominant site of metastases or chemotherapy regimen (P = 0.04 for CFP; P = 0.08 for CFPMV; and P = 0.20 for AC). The advantage of a better response for ER- patients was nullified by an earlier relapse which was reflected in longer duration of remission, time to treatment failure, and survival in favor of ER+ patients (12.3 months versus 7.3 months remission duration, 18.7 months versus 13.6 months survival in partial responders). These data suggest that ER- patients respond to a higher extent to chemotherapy but relapse sooner than ER+ patients, suggesting a more rapid growth for ER- tumors. In patients with ER- tumors and poorer prognosis on conventional chemotherapy, new trials of intensive consolidation after response should be considered. Patients with advanced breast cancer were randomised to 3M (mitozantrone 6.5 mg/m2q 21 days, methotrexate 30 mg/m2q 21 days, mitomycin C 6.5 mg/m2q 42 days) or 2M (as 3M but without mitomycin C). The objective response rates of 30% in 51 evaluable patients receiving 3M and 26% of 54 patients receiving 2M were not significantly different. 4/16 patients not responding to 2M responded to 3M on crossover. Both regimes were well tolerated but there was significantly less haematological toxicity and fewer dose reductions and delays with 2M. We conclude that patients should initially be treated with 2M and that non-responding patients should be crossed to 3M. nan We report the results of a randomized trial carried out by the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and in which 230 patients with advanced breast cancer receiving concurrently a hormonal treatment (oophorectomy for pre- and tamoxifen for postmenopausal women) were randomly allocated to three different regimens of combination chemotherapy. The therapeutic results registered with the two more intensive combinations (LMP/FVP and LMFP/ADM) were similar with regard to response rates, time to progression and survival. The patients receiving the low-dose chemotherapy lmfp showed a statistically significant lower response rate (32%, P less than 0.001) and a shorter survival (P = 0.03) than the results observed in patients treated with the two other regimens. This difference was particularly pronounced, at least regarding survival, in the following subgroups: postmenopausal women, patients with a poor performance status, dominant visceral lesions, two sites of disease and a disease-free interval longer than 12 months. Patients with bony metastases as dominant lesion fared similarly with all three regimens of chemotherapy. This latter subset of advanced breast cancer patients should probably be spared too intensive cytotoxic treatment. This is, to our knowledge, the first report of a randomized trial showing an evident correlation between response rate and survival in various subgroups of patients with advanced breast cancer treated with different chemotherapeutic regimens. In 126 postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, four chemotherapeutic combination programs were tested. Patients were stratified and randomized to one of the four programs: (1) fluorouracil, cytoxan and prednisone (CFP): (2) fluorouracil, cytoxan and Adriamycin (CAF); (3) cytoxan and Adriamycin (CA); or (4) alternating combinations of CFP-CA. Objective response rates were 17% for 18 patients on CFP, 25% for 40 patients on CAF, 42% for 41 patients on CA and 63% for 19 patients on CFP-CA. CFP-CA provided a significantly higher response rate than either CFP or CAF. The response rate of CA was intermediate. The duration of remission and survival were similar for all four groups. When progression or relapse following remission was demonstrated, patients were rerandomized to either adrenalectomy or tamoxifen. There were no responders either in the 15 patients undergoing adrenalectomy or the 11 patients receiving tamoxifen. In a crossover study, nine adrenalectomized patients received tamoxifen and four tamoxifen-treated patients underwent adrenalectomy. None responded. It appears that response rates to hormonal modalities are reduced in patients previously treated by combination chemotherapy. Forty-eight women with advanced metastatic carcinoma of the breast were treated with one of two combination chemotherapy regimens: 1) adriamycin and cyclophosphamide or 2) adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil. The response rate in the two-drug treatment group was 50% and in the four-drug treatment group, 55%. The median duration of response was ten months in both treatment groups. Dramatic responses were seen in patients with visceral metastases. Patients who responded to chemotherapy had a significantly longer survival than nonresponders (p less than 0.01). The long interval between adriamycin doses (six weeks) in the four drug regimen did not adversely effect the response rate--an important finding in view of the dose-related cardiac toxicity of this agent.
The addition of one or more drugs to the regimen shows a statistically significant advantage for tumour response in women with metastatic breast cancer but the results suggest no difference in survival time or time to progression. The positive effect on tumour response was also associated with increased toxicity.