4.7 Article

Is risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse related to adjuvant taxane treatment in node-positive breast cancer? Results of the CNS substudy in the intergroup phase III BIG 02-98 trial

期刊

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
卷 19, 期 11, 页码 1837-1841

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdn385

关键词

adjuvant chemotherapy; breast cancer; central nervous system; meningeal carcinomatosis; taxane; trastuzumab

类别

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council [100925, 351164]
  2. U. S. NCI [CA-73362]
  3. Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Breast cancer central nervous system (CNS) metastases are an increasingly important problem because of high CNS relapse rates in patients treated with trastuzumab and/or taxanes. Patients and methods: We evaluated data from 2887 node-positive breast cancer patients randomised in the BIG 02-98 trial comparing anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy (control arms) to anthracycline-docetaxel-based sequential or concurrent chemotherapy (experimental arms). After a median follow-up of 5 years, 403 patients had died and detailed information on CNS relapse was collected for these patients. Results: CNS relapse occurred in 4.0% of control patients and 3.7% of docetaxel-treated patients. CNS relapse occurred in 27% of deceased patients in both treatment groups. CNS relapse was usually accompanied by neurologic symptoms (90%), and 25% of patients with CNS relapse died without evidence of extra-CNS relapse. Only 20% of patients survived 1 year from the diagnosis of CNS relapse. Prognosis of CNS relapse was worse for patients with meningeal carcinomatosis when compared with brain metastases. Unexpected findings included a higher rate of positive cerebrospinal fluid cytology (8% versus 3%) and more frequent use of magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis (47% versus 30%) in the docetaxel-treated patients. Conclusion: There is no evidence that adjuvant docetaxel treatment is associated with an increased frequency of CNS relapse.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据