Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by weekly docetaxel as neoadjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: analysis of biological markers in a GEICAM phase II study

  • Research Articles
  • Published:
Clinical and Translational Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

To evaluate the sequential administration of doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) followed by weekly docetaxel in women with stage II to IIIA breast cancer.

Patients and methods

Patients received 60 mg/m2 of A and 600 mg/m2 of C every three weeks for four cycles followed by 12 infusions of weekly docetaxel at a dose of 36 mg/m2 and with a 2-week resting period.

Results

Sixty-three women were included. On an intentionto-treat basis, clinical response rate was 90% (95% CI: 83–98), with 46% complete responses. Breast-conserving surgery could be performed in 43 patients (68%). Complete pathological responses in the breast were confirmed in 17% of patients. No correlations between levels of expression of topoisomerase II alpha, survivin or p27 and the pathological response were detected. The study treatment was generally well tolerated.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant AC followed by weekly docetaxel is a feasible regimen for patients with early-stage breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nabholtz JM, Gligorov J (2005) Docetaxel in the treatment of breast cancer: current experience and future prospects. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 5: 613–633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Costa SD, von Minckwitz G, Raab G et al (1999) The role of docetaxel (Taxotere) in neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer. Semin Oncol 26:24–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Goble S, Bear HD (2003) Emerging role of taxanes in adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: the potential and the questions. Surg Clin North Am 83:943–971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hutcheon AW, Heys SD, Sarkar TK (2003) Neoadjuvant docetaxel in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 79[Suppl 1]:S19–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bear HD, Anderson S, Brown A et al (2003) The effect on tumor response of adding sequential preoperative docetaxel to preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: preliminary results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 21:4165–4174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE et al (2006) Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 24:2019–2027

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith IC, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW et al (2002) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: significantly enhanced response with docetaxel. J Clin Oncol 20:1456–1466

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A et al (2005) Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: the GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 23:2676–2685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nabholtz JM, Senn HJ, Bezwoda WR et al (1999) Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus mitomycin plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. 304 Study Group. J Clin Oncol 17:1413–1424

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nabholtz JM, Falkson C, Campos D et al (2003) Docetaxel and doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: results of a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 21:968–975

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Estevez LG, Cuevas JM, Anton A et al (2003) Weekly docetaxel as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and III breast cancer: efficacy and correlation with biological markers in a phase II, multicenter study. Clin Cancer Res 9:686–692

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Green MC, Buzdar AU, Smith T et al (2005) Weekly paclitaxel improves pathologic complete remission in operable breast cancer when compared with paclitaxel once every 3 weeks. J Clin Oncol 23:5983–5992

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. (1999) Common Toxicity Criteria, Version 2.0. National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Bethesda, MD, pp 1–27

  14. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S et al (2003) A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast 12:320–327

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Durbecq V, Paesmans M, Cardoso F et al (2004) Topoisomerase-II alpha expression as a predictive marker in a population of advanced breast cancer patients randomly treated either with single-agent doxorubicin or single-agent docetaxel. Mol Cancer Ther 3:1207–1214

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jarvinen TA, Liu ET (2003) HER-2/neu and topoisomerase IIalpha in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 78:299–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Barrett-Lee PJ (2005) Growth factor signalling in clinical breast cancer and its impact on response to conventional therapies: a review of chemotherapy. Endocr Relat Cancer 12[Suppl 1]:S125–133

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tanner M, Isola J, Wiklund T et al (2006) Topoisomerase IIalpha gene amplification predicts favorable treatment response to tailored and dose-escalated anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy in HER-2/neu-amplified breast cancer: Scandinavian Breast Group Trial 9401. J Clin Oncol24:2428–2436

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Arriola E, Moreno A, Varela M et al (2006) Predictive value of HER-2 and Topoisomerase IIalpha in response to primary doxorubicin in breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 42:2954–2960

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Manna Edel F, Teixeira LC, Alvarenga M (2006) Association between immunohistochemical expression of topoisomerase IIalpha, HER2 and hormone receptors and response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. Tumori 92:222–229

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Villman K, Sjostrom J, Heikkila R et al (2006) TOP2A and HER2 gene amplification as predictors of response to anthracycline treatment in breast cancer. Acta Oncol 45:590–596

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rody A, Karn T, Gatje R et al (2006) Gene expression profiling of breast cancer patients treated with docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide within the GEPARTRIO trial: HER-2, but not topoisomerase II alpha and microtubuleassociated protein tau, is highly predictive of tumor response. Breast 16:86–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zaffaroni N, Pennati M, Daidone MG (2005) Survivin as a target for new anticancer interventions. J Cell Mol Med 9:360–372

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tanaka K, Iwamoto S, Gon G et al (2000) Expression of survivin and its relationship to loss of apoptosis in breast carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 6:127–134

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Salz W, Eisenberg D, Plescia J et al (2005) A survivin gene signature predicts aggressive tumor behavior. Cancer Res 65:3531–3534

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Span PN, Sweep FC, Wiegerinck ET et al (2004) Survivin is an independent prognostic marker for risk stratification of breast cancer patients. Clin Chem 50:1986–1993

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ryan BM, Konecny GE, Kahlert S et al (2006) Survivin expression in breast cancer predicts clinical outcome and is associated with HER2, VEGF, urokinase plasminogen activator and PAI-1. Ann Oncol 17:597–604

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kennedy SM, O’Driscoll L, Purcell R et al (2003) Prognostic importance of survivin in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 88:1077–1083

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. O’Driscoll L, Linehan R, M Kennedy S et al (2003) Lack of prognostic significance of survivin, survivin-deltaEx3, survivin-2B, galectin-3, bag-1, bax-alpha and MRP-1 mRNAs in breast cancer. Cancer Lett 201:225–236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Alkarain A, Slingerland J (2004) Deregulation of p27 by oncogenic signaling and its prognostic significance in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 6:13–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Clarke RB (2003) p27KIP1 phosphorylation by PKB/Akt leads to poor breast cancer prognosis. Breast Cancer Res 5:162–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Barbareschi M (1999) p27 Expression, a cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor in breast carcinoma. Adv Clin Pathol 3:119–127

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Barnes A, Pinder SE, Bell JA et al (2003) Expression of p27kip1 in breast cancer and its prognostic significance. J Pathol 201:451–459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Colozza M, Azambuja E, Cardoso F et al (2005) Proliferative markers as prognostic and predictive tools in early breast cancer: where are we now? Ann Oncol 16:1723–1739

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain

    Laura G. Estevez & José Luis Fortes

  2. Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain

    Encarna Adrover & Gloria Peiró

  3. Hospital Universitario Germans Trias i Pujol, Barcelona, Spain

    Mireia Margelí & Eva Castellá

  4. Hospital de la Ribera, Valencia, Spain

    José Miguel Cuevas & Laia Bernet

  5. Consorci Hospitalari Parc Tauli, Barcelona, Spain

    Miguel Angel Segui & Xavier Andreu

  6. GEICAM Cooperative, Group Avda Pirineos7, 1°–14, ES-28700, San Sebastián de los Reyes, Madrid, Spain

    Laura G. Estevez

Authors
  1. Laura G. Estevez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. José Luis Fortes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Encarna Adrover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gloria Peiró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mireia Margelí
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eva Castellá
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. José Miguel Cuevas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Laia Bernet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Miguel Angel Segui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xavier Andreu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

Spanish Breast Cancer Research Group (GEICAM)

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura G. Estevez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Estevez, L.G., Fortes, J.L., Adrover, E. et al. Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by weekly docetaxel as neoadjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: analysis of biological markers in a GEICAM phase II study. Clin Transl Oncol 11, 54–59 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0311-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-009-0311-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation