Background: Symptomatic brain metastases occur in approximately 10–15% of patients suffering from breast cancer and are linked to a clear deterioration of the patient’s condition. Although radiotherapy is recommended as a primary therapy, the optimal management remains controversial. To evaluate the role of topotecan as a primary chemotherapy for brain metastases, we performed a pilot study in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Patients and Methods: 24 patients with newly diagnosed, bidimensionally measurable brain metastases received topotecan, 1.5 mg/m² day, 30-min infusion for 5 days every 3 weeks. A total of 93 courses of therapy were administered (range 1–11, median 3 courses per patient). Prior radiotherapy was excluded. Most of the patients had received prior adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy. Results: 3/24 patients were withdrawn from the study for various reasons, 16/24 patients could be evaluated in terms of their response to therapy; 1 and 5 patients showed complete and partial response to therapy, respectively, and 5 patients had a stable condition. The median time of survival was 6.25 months. Hematologic toxicity was the major side effect, nonhematologic side effects occurred rarely and were tolerable. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that primary chemotherapy with topotecan is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with breast cancer and CNS metastases. Based on this pilot study, future clinical protocols should be developed including multimodal treatment strategies (i.e. radiotherapy).

Background: Vinorelbine and docetaxel are active in anthracycline-pretreated, metastatic breast cancer. We compared their efficacy. Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized to receive weekly vinorelbine (VIN) or weekly docetaxel (DOC), 6 weekly doses per 8-week cycle, with optional crossover (X-DOC vs. X-VIN. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP) on initial treatment. Remission induction, survival, and quality of life were secondary end points. Results: Among 122 poor risk patients, a non-significant trend for better TTP was seen for DOC, both on initial and on crossover treatment. Responses were seen on either treatment, but progression was more common with VIN than with DOC, while more patients had a response with X-DOC than with X-VIN. Survival was identical in those receiving only the initial VIN vs. DOC and in the subgroups receiving crossover treatments. Grade 3–4 toxicity, especially hematological toxicity resulting in treatment delay, was more common with VIN. Non-graded toxicity contributed to abandoning DOC. Quality of life scores reflected worse results in patients crossing treatment arms, in either direction. Conclusions: DOC showed marginally better activity but did not improve TTP or other endpoints over VIN in this poor risk population.

No abstract

No abstract