Adjuvant CMFVP versus tamoxifen versus concurrent CMFVP and tamoxifen for postmenopausal, node-positive, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

Rivkin, Saul E.; Green, S; Metch, Barbara; Cruz, Anatolio B.; Abeloff, Martin D.; Jewell, William R.; Costanzi, John J.; Farrar, William B.; Minton, June; Osborne, C. Kent

doi:10.1200/jco.1994.12.10.2078

Cited by 95 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless the suggestion that combining paclitaxel and tamoxifen together may not be beneficial reflects previous in vitro observations demonstrating that tamoxifen can attenuate the cytotoxic effects of chemotherapeutic agents 55 and the current clinical consensus that treatment with concurrent tamoxifen and chemotherapy is not associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes. 56,[60][61][62] The observation that tamoxifen is not only is associated with cell cycle arrest, but also apoptosis is an important point. This suggests that paclitaxel might be unnecessary when treating tamoxifen-sensitive ERα+ breast cancers because both apoptosis and cell growth arrest have already been successfully activated by tamoxifen treatment.…”

Section: Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity To Paclitaxel Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity to Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer

Dougherty¹,

Schumaker²,

Jordan³

et al. 2004

Cancer Biology & Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research Paper Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity to Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer ABSTRACTA retrospective analysis of CALGB trial 9344 suggested paclitaxel administration following cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin adjuvant chemotherapy is most beneficial for patients with ERα negative (ERα-) breast cancer. Since the cytotoxic effects of paclitaxel are cell cycle dependent, we postulated that the relationship between ERα and the effectiveness of adjuvant paclitaxel reflects the observation that ERα positive (ERα+) breast cancers proliferate more slowly than ERα-breast cancers. Three in vitro models (MCF-7, T47D and ZR-75) were examined to compare growth rates and paclitaxelinduced apoptosis in ERα+ and ERα-clones of the same, originally ERα+ cell line. For the T47D and ZR-75 cell lines, loss of ERα was associated with a decrease in doubling time and an increase in paclitaxel sensitivity. However, when cell culture conditions were altered to achieve equivalent cell proliferation rates, no difference in paclitaxel sensitivity was observed. Similarly, an ERα-clone of MCF-7 cells that did not exhibit an enhanced growth rate compared to its ERα+ counterpart also did not show increased paclitaxel sensitivity. The combined apoptotic effects of tamoxifen and paclitaxel on MCF-7 cells were not synergistic or even clearly additive. In these in vitro models, the effectiveness of paclitaxel correlated more closely with growth rate than ERα expression. These data suggest that measurements of tumor proliferation may provide more accurate predictive markers for the benefits of adjuvant paclitaxel than ERα analysis.

show abstract

Section: Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity To Paclitaxel Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity to Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer

Dougherty¹,

Schumaker²,

Jordan³

et al. 2004

Cancer Biology & Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first attempt at such a study was a retrospective analysis [3]of data derived from randomized clinical trials of therapy in patients with breast cancer [29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41]; data that was collected prospectively. In the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) trial B13 study, women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-negative breast cancer received tamoxifen or placebo.…”

Section: Vte As a Complication Of Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology of Thrombosis in Cancer

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have utilized epidemiological data to address three questions in patients with cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE): (1) What is the risk for occult cancer in patients with idiopathic versus secondary VTE? (2) What is the risk for thrombosis in patients with cancer (vs. noncancer patients)? (3) What is the risk of recurrent VTE in cancer patients with an initial episode of VTE compared to noncancer patients? The risk for a new cancer diagnosis within 6–12 months of the diagnosis of idiopathic VTE (including pulmonary embolism) is well supported by retrospective analyses of large numbers of unselected patients, population-based retrospective cohort analyses from large registries and prospective studies. The odds ratios for these studies are in the range of 4- to 7-fold increased risk. In surgical patients with known cancer the odds ratio for an episode of postoperative VTE is approximately 2, when compared to a control group of noncancer patients subjected to the same procedures. A similar odds ratio of approximately 2 exists for the relative risk for recurrence of VTE in the first 3 months after an initial episode in cancer patients treated with heparin and warfarin (Coumadin^®) compared to noncancer patients. Therefore, patients with idiopathic VTE are at increased risk for occult cancer and cancer patients are at increased risk for VTE. Appropriate studies are underway to determine the best strategies for anticoagulant management of these patients.

show abstract

“…Several individual trials and large meta-analysis have contributed to the building-up of the present state of art [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemotherapy versus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in node-positive, oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients. Very late results of the ‘gruppo di ricerca per la chemio-ormonoterapia adiuvante (GROCTA)’ 01-Trial in early breast cancer

Boccardo

Guglielmini

Parodi

et al. 2011

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Adjuvant CMFVP versus tamoxifen versus concurrent CMFVP and tamoxifen for postmenopausal, node-positive, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a Southwest Oncology Group study.

Abstract: CMFVP chemotherapy, either alone or in combination with tamoxifen, has not been shown to be superior to tamoxifen alone in the treatment of postmenopausal women with node-positive, ER-positive, operable breast cancer.

Cited by 95 publications

References 18 publications

Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity to Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer

Estrogen Receptor Expression and Sensitivity to Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer

Epidemiology of Thrombosis in Cancer

Chemotherapy versus tamoxifen versus chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in node-positive, oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients. Very late results of the ‘gruppo di ricerca per la chemio-ormonoterapia adiuvante (GROCTA)’ 01-Trial in early breast cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About