Molecular predictors of efficacy of adjuvant weekly paclitaxel in early breast cancer

Martín, Miguel; Rodríguez-Lescure, Álvaro; Ruı́z, Amparo; Alba, Emilio; Calvo, Lourdes; Ruíz‐Borrego, Manuel; Santaballa, Ana; Rodrı́guez, César; Crespo, Carmen; Abad, María del Mar; Domínguez, Severina; Florián, Jesús; Llorca, Cristina; Méndez, Miguel; Godes, María; Cubedo, Ricardo; Murias, A; Batista, Norberto; García, Maria José; Caballero, Rosalía; Álava, Enrique de

doi:10.1007/s10549-009-0663-z

Cited by 78 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No DFS advantage was seen in the luminal A population [22]. Similarly, the GEICAM 9906 trial comparing FEC to FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel, found that the paclitaxel benefit was mainly concentrated in the triple negative/basal-like patient population [65]. However, all these studies have the disadvantage of having compared multi-drug regimens and, as such, attributing benefit to any of drug individually becomes very difficult.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genomic predictors of response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel in primary breast cancer

Martín

Romero

Cheang

et al. 2011

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genomic predictors of response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel in primary breast cancer

Martín

Romero

Cheang

et al. 2011

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although there is no standard chemotherapy regimen that specifically applies to women with triple-negative breast cancers, anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy remains the most commonly used regimen, especially since taxanes have significant activity in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancers [9][10][11]. As an example, in the GEICAM 9906 trial of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) versus FEC followed by paclitaxel, the addition of paclitaxel was associated with a significant improvement in disease-free survival at seven years (74 versus 56 percent, respectively) [11]. Our patients were treated by 3 cycles FEC followed by 3 cycles of decetaxel.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Triple Negative Breast Cancer: A Single Centre Experience

Mouden¹,

Semmar²,

Rahali³

et al. 2017

J Cancer Sci Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of our study is to evaluate the outcome and prognostic factors of triple negative breast cancers in our own experience and we give a critical analysis and an overview of the current prognostic from other institutions. Materials and methods:One hundred and forty-two patients were evaluated who presented to National Institute of Oncology of Rabat with triple negative breast cancers between January 2010 and December 2010. They were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had invasive breast carcinoma and distribution of stage was 19%, 49.3%, 11.2% and 20.5% for T1, T2, T3 and T4, respectively. Treatment consisted in a mastectomy or conservative surgery with lymphadenectomy, chemotherapy and adjuvant radiotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (DFS) were calculated using Kaplan Meier method. Results:Median age was 48 years (range: 27-86 years). Postmenopausal women presented 47.2% of cases. With a median follow-up of 24.5 months (10-60 months), the rate of local control was 59.9%. We found 18 (12.7%) local relapses, 26 (18.3%) distant relapses. At 5 years, Overall survival(OS), Relapse free survival (RFS) were 61.7% and 53.2% respectively. Conclusion:Our results emphasize that triple negative breast cancers have a worse prognosis and tend to relapse early which is consistent with other studies.

show abstract

“…21 Efficacy of paclitaxel specifically for TNBC (compared with non-TNBC) has been observed in subtype analyses within clinical trials. 24,25 However, these associations between TNBC and taxanes have not been consistent; a meta-analysis has shown benefit for taxane in the adjuvant setting independent of ER status. 26 Ixabepilone is an epothilone B analogue that stabilizes microtubules and has activity in patients with TNBC as a monotherapy.…”

Section: Microtubule-targeting Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treating Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Where Are We?

Morikawa

Seidman

2015

J Natl Compr Canc Netw

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unlike estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and HER2-positive breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) lacks a repertoire of targeted therapies. Hence, chemotherapy is the only available systemic option in current clinical practice. In general, survival of patients with TNBC is worse than that for those with ER-positive and HER2-positive breast cancer, especially for advanced-stage disease. Thus, a great unmet need exists. Conventional chemotherapeutic agents such as platinumsalts have been examined for specific benefit in TNBC; however, no one agent has yet been shown to offer a differential incremental benefit in metastatic TNBC. The hope is that ongoing research in targetable molecular pathways will lead to new therapeutic options for TNBC. Because these patients are likely to be increasingly subcategorized using potentially targetable molecular alterations, investigators will need to be mindful of the challenges in designing and conducting clinical trials in smaller subpopulations. The successful incorporation of targeted therapies in routine clinical practice for TNBC, which mirrors the success achieved by anti-HER2 and endocrine therapies, is awaited. (J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2015;13:(e8-e18) and rare types, such as adenoid cystic, metaplastic, apocrine, and neuroendocrine carcinoma.3 Nevertheless, the clinical utility of this categorization has been robust as a prognostic and predictive biomarker.Patients with TNBC are more likely to have a poor prognosis than those with estrogen receptor (ER)/ progesterone receptor (PR)-positive and/or HER2-positive breast cancer.4 This is likely partially attributable to a dearth of novel therapeutic options for TNBC, in contrast to the recent expansion of endocrine and anti-HER2 therapies (eg, ado-trastuzumab-emtansine, pertuzumab, everolimus with exemestane).5-7 Therefore, great interest has been shown in exploring potential biomarkers (prognostic and predictive) and developing new therapeutic options. This article reviews current treatment options ("where are we now?") and ongoing therapeutic research ("where are we going?") for TNBC. Heterogeneity of TNBCBecause the utilitarian definition of TNBC is simply based on the exclusion of ER/PR/HER2 expression, it is not unexpected that this clinical subtype remains biologically heterogeneous. Studies examining tumor characteristics have found correlations between TNBC and certain molecular genomic features, such as basal cytokeratin (eg, CK5/6) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression, checkpoint kinase (Chk1), p53 alterations, and BRCA1 germline mutations.8-13 TNBC has also been shown to have overlapping features with the basal-like subtype (intrinsic breast cancer classification), 14,15 including a high frequency of poorly differentiated tumors, expression of cytokeratins and EGFR, and p53 mutations. Although the basal-like-subtypes are most often triple-negative, they are not equivalent groups.16

show abstract

Molecular predictors of efficacy of adjuvant weekly paclitaxel in early breast cancer

Cited by 78 publications

References 24 publications

Genomic predictors of response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel in primary breast cancer

Genomic predictors of response to doxorubicin versus docetaxel in primary breast cancer

Triple Negative Breast Cancer: A Single Centre Experience

Treating Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Where Are We?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About