We sought the extent to which arm morbidity could be reduced by using sentinel-lymph-node-based management in women with clinically node-negative early breast cancer. One thousand eighty-eight women were randomly allocated to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy followed by axillary clearance if the sentinel node was positive or not detected (SNBM) or routine axillary clearance (RAC, sentinel-lymph-node biopsy followed immediately by axillary clearance). Sentinel nodes were located using blue dye, alone or with technetium-labeled antimony sulfide colloid. The primary endpoint was increase in arm volume from baseline to the average of measurements at 6 and 12 months. Secondary endpoints were the proportions of women with at least 15% increase in arm volume or early axillary morbidity, and average scores for arm symptoms, dysfunctions, and disabilities assessed at 6 and 12 months by patients with the SNAC Study-Specific Scales and other quality-of-life instruments. Sensitivity, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values for sentinel-lymph-node biopsy were estimated in the RAC group. The average increase in arm volume was 2.8% in the SNBM group and 4.2% in the RAC group (P = 0.002). Patients in the SNBM group gave lower ratings for arm swelling (P < 0.001), symptoms (P < 0.001), and dysfunctions (P = 0.02), but not disabilities (P = 0.5). Sentinel nodes were found in 95% of the SNBM group (29% positive) and 93% of the RAC group (25% positive). SNB had sensitivity 94.5%, false-negative rate 5.5%, and negative predictive value 98%. SNBM was successfully undertaken in a wide range of surgical centers and caused significantly less morbidity than RAC.
Participation in screening was associated with a breast-cancer mortality reduction of between 30 and 41%, depending on assumptions about screening self-selection bias. A downward mortality risk by recency of last screen prior to cancer diagnosis, and frequency of recent screening, is consistent with a screening effect.
Since chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer is not curative, consideration of the quality of life is important in selecting a treatment regimen. We conducted a randomized trial comparing continuous chemotherapy, administered until disease progression was evident, with intermittent therapy, whereby treatment was stopped after three cycles and then repeated for three more cycles only when there was evidence of disease progression. Each approach was tested with doxorubicin combined with cyclophosphamide or with cyclophosphamide combined with methotrexate, fluorouracil, and prednisone. Intermittent therapy resulted in a significantly worse response (P = 0.02 by Mann-Whitney test), a significantly shorter time to disease progression (relative risk based on proportional-hazards model, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 2.4), and a trend toward shorter survival (relative risk, 1.3; confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.6). The quality of life was expressed as linear-analogue self-assessment scores for physical well-being, mood, pain, and appetite and as a quality-of-life index. It improved significantly during the first three cycles, when all patients received treatment. Thereafter, intermittent therapy was associated with worse scores for physical well-being (by 23 percent of scale; 95 percent confidence interval, 11 to 35 percent), mood (25 percent; 13 to 37 percent), and appetite (12 percent; 0 to 24 percent) and for the quality-of-life index as indicated by the patient (14 percent; 5 to 23 percent) and the physician (16 percent; 7 to 26 percent). Changes in the quality of life were independent prognostic factors in proportional-hazards models of subsequent survival. We conclude that, as tested, continuous chemotherapy is better than intermittent chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer.
Despite the toxicities encountered with bleomycin in cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy for these patients, complete deletion of this drug compromises therapeutic efficacy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.