Randomized phase II study of two doses of gefitinib in hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group

PURPOSE

Overexpression of the epidermal growth factor receptor has been demonstrated in advanced prostate cancer and is associated with a poor outcome. A multi-institutional, randomized, phase II study was undertaken by the National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of two doses of oral gefitinib in patients with minimally symptomatic, hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July and November 2001, 40 patients with HRPC and increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or progression in measurable disease who had not received prior chemotherapy were randomly assigned to 250 mg (n = 19) or 500 mg (n = 21) oral gefitinib daily continuously. The primary end points were PSA response rate and objective measurable response. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate Cancer Subscale (FACT-P) quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline and during treatment.

RESULTS

None of the patients demonstrated a PSA or objective measurable response. Five (14.3%) of 35 assessable patients had stable PSA (one patient at 250 mg and four patients at 500 mg), and five patients (14.3%) had a best response of stable disease (duration, 2.5 to 16.8 months). No significant effect on the rate of increase in PSA was seen. The most common drug-related nonhematologic toxicities observed were grade 1 to 2 diarrhea (250 mg, 65%; 500 mg, 56%), fatigue (250 mg, 29%; 500 mg, 33%), and grade 1 to 2 skin rash (250 mg, 24%; 500 mg, 39%). FACT-P scores decreased during treatment, indicating worsening of symptoms compared with baseline.

CONCLUSION

Gefitinib did not result in any responses in PSA or objective measurable disease at either dose level. Gefitinib has minimal single-agent activity in HRPC.

A phase 1 study of OSI-211 given as an intravenous infusion days 1, 2, and 3 every three weeks in patients with solid cancers

PURPOSE

To define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RD) and dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of liposomal lurtotecan, OSI-211 (formerly known as NX211), given as a short intravenous infusion on days 1, 2, and 3 every three weeks.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Thirty-seven patients were enrolled and treated in a dose escalation study from a starting dose of 0.15 mg/m(2) daily x 3 to 2.1 mg/m(2) daily x 3. Detailed pharmacokinetic analyses of blood were done on both days 1 and 3 of the first cycle and toxicity was monitored.

RESULTS

Two MTDs were defined; one for patients defined as minimally pretreated and one for those heavily pretreated. Dose limiting toxicity was myelosuppression: primarily thrombocytopenia although neutropenia was also noted. The MTD was 2.1 mg/m(2)/d (total dose of 6.3 mg/m(2)) in minimally pretreated patients and 1.8 mg/m(2)/d (5.4 mg/m(2) total dose) in heavily pretreated patients. Pharmacokinetics revealed that AUC and C (max) increased with dose and were significantly higher than that of free lurtotecan (AUC approx. 100 fold higher). The half life and duration of the active lactone form were also significantly longer than historical data on free drug. Two partial responses were seen, one each in a patient with breast and ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Two Phase II recommended doses were established for OSI-211 given as a daily x 3 schedule every three weeks. The recommended phase II dose is 1.8 mg/m(2) daily x 3 for minimally pretreated patients and 1.5 mg/m(2) for those heavily pretreated. Phase II studies should be initiated in sensitive tumours.

Abbreviated Course of Radiation Therapy in Older Patients With Glioblastoma Multiforme: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To prospectively compare standard radiation therapy (RT) with an abbreviated course of RT in older patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).

Patients and Methods

One hundred patients with GBM, age 60 years or older, were randomly assigned after surgery to receive either standard RT (60 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks) or a shorter course of RT (40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival. The secondary end points were proportionate survival at 6 months, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and corticosteroid requirement. HRQoL was assessed using the Karnofsky performance status (KPS) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br).

Results

All patients had died at the time of analysis. Overall survival times measured from randomization were similar at 5.1 months for standard RT versus 5.6 months for the shorter course (log-rank test, P = .57). The survival probabilities at 6 months were also similar at 44.7% for standard RT versus 41.7% for the shorter course (lower-bound 95% CI, −13.7). KPS scores varied markedly but were not significantly different between the two groups (Wilcoxon test, P = .63). Low completion rates of the FACT-Br (45%) precluded meaningful comparisons between the two groups. Of patients completing RT as planned, 49% of patients (standard RT) versus 23% required an increase in posttreatment corticosteroid dosage (χ2 test, P = .02).

Conclusion

There is no difference in survival between patients receiving standard RT or short-course RT. In view of the similar KPS scores, decreased increment in corticosteroid requirement, and reduced treatment time, the abbreviated course of RT seems to be a reasonable treatment option for older patients with GBM.

A phase I study of OSI-211 and cisplatin as intravenous infusions given on days 1, 2 and 3 every 3 weeks in patients with solid cancers

BACKGROUND

OSI-211 (also known as NX211) is a liposomal preparation of the topoisomerase I inhibitor, lurtotecan, which has shown antitumor activity in phase I and II clinical trials. Cisplatin is a widely used antineoplastic agent with activity in a broad range of tumor types. This phase I trial was conducted to determine the recommended doses of these agents, and their pharmacokinetic properties and toxicities in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fourteen patients with advanced and/or metastatic solid malignancies were enrolled in this trial. The first planned dose level was OSI-211 0.9 mg/m(2) with cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) administered intravenously daily for the first three consecutive days of a 21-day cycle. Patients were evaluated for hematological and non-hematological toxicities, and pharmacokinetic studies were performed on both agents.

RESULTS

The recommended phase II dose was determined to be 0.7 mg/m(2) OSI-211 given with 25 mg/m(2) cisplatin. Dose-limiting neutropenia was seen in two of three patients at the starting dose level. Three of 11 patients at the second (lower) dose level experienced dose-limiting thrombocytopenia; febrile neutropenia was also seen in one patient. Non-hematological toxicities were generally manageable and included fatigue, nausea and vomiting. Considerable variability was seen in both hematological toxicities and pharmacokinetics. One complete response and three partial responses were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommended phase II dose for this combination is 0.7 mg/m(2) OSI-211 with 25 mg/m(2) cisplatin given as an intravenous infusion on days 1, 2 and 3 of a 21-day cycle. The main toxicity was myelosuppression. Preliminary evidence of antitumor activity was seen.

Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18

National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) Protocol B-18 was initiated in 1988 to determine whether four cycles of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide given preoperatively improve survival and disease-free survival (DFS) when compared with the same chemotherapy given postoperatively. Secondary aims included the evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy in downstaging the primary breast tumor and involved axillary lymph nodes, the comparison of lumpectomy rates and rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) in the two treatment groups, and the assessment of the correlation between primary tumor response and outcome. Initially published findings were based on a follow-up of 5 years; this report updates results through 9 years of follow-up. There continue to be no statistically significant overall differences in survival or DFS between the two treatment groups. Survival at 9 years is 70% in the postoperative group and 69% in the preoperative group (P =.80). DFS is 53% in postoperative patients and 55% in preoperative patients (P =.50). A statistically significant correlation persists between primary tumor response and outcome, and this correlation has become statistically stronger with longer follow-up. Patients assigned to preoperative chemotherapy received notably more lumpectomies than postoperative patients, especially among patients with tumors greater than 5 cm at study entry. Although the rate of IBTR was slightly higher in the preoperative group (10.7% versus 7.6%), this difference was not statistically significant. Marginally statistically significant treatment-by-age interactions appear to be emerging for survival and DFS, suggesting that younger patients may benefit from preoperative therapy, whereas the reverse may be true for older patients.

Duration of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy

The benefit of using adjuvant tamoxifen to treat breast cancer has been firmly established for patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors, regardless of age, lymph node status, or menopausal status. Uncertainty remains, however, regarding the optimal duration of tamoxifen therapy. We reviewed the findings of randomized clinical trials that directly compared alternative treatment durations. Trials comparing short-term adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen (i.e., 1-3 years) with treatments having durations of about 5 years consistently have demonstrated additional benefits stemming from the longer therapy. Trials testing 5 years of treatment with longer durations have, in the aggregate, suggested no additional benefit for the patient. Nevertheless, the number of recurrences reported to date in these trials is not large, and the results of the individual trials are heterogeneous. Furthermore, as a result of tamoxifen's "carryover" effect, duration trials require considerable follow-up before definitive results can be established. Until more definitive data become available, adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen should be limited to 5 years outside the clinical trials setting. Continued accrual of ER-positive patients to ongoing tamoxifen duration trials, including the Adjuvant Tamoxifen Treatment Offer More (aTTom) and Adjuvant Tamoxifen Longer Against Shorter (ATLAS) trials, is appropriate. Alternatively, patients who remain disease free after 5 years of tamoxifen therapy should be encouraged to participate in trials testing crossover to other hormonal interventions, including selective ER modulators or aromatase inhibitors.

Findings from recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project adjuvant studies in stage I breast cancer

Before 1989, credible information about the treatment of breast cancer was derived mainly from randomized clinical trials that enrolled women with either metastatic (stage IV); locally advanced (stage III); or primary, operable, axillary lymph node-positive (stage II) disease. This report provides information from six recent National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trials involving lymph node-negative (stage I) patients. Findings from NSABP B-13 demonstrated, through 14 years of follow-up, improvements in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival from methotrexate and fluorouracil (MF), regardless of age, in women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumors. Results from NSABP B-19, which was conducted with similar patients, demonstrated, through 8 years, a greater overall DFS and survival advantage with cyclophosphamide and MF (CMF) than that observed with MF. Findings from NSABP B-23, in which patients similar to those in B-13 and B-19 were randomly assigned to receive CMF plus placebo, CMF plus tamoxifen (TAM), doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (AC) plus placebo, or AC plus TAM, demonstrated no difference in relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival among the four groups through 5 years, either for all patients or relative to age. NSABP B-14, which was carried out in women with ER-positive tumors, compared the outcomes of those who received either placebo or TAM. Through 14 years, superior DFS and overall survival advantages, as well as a reduction in contralateral breast cancer, were observed with TAM. No additional benefit resulted from TAM administration beyond 5 years. Findings from NSABP B-20, a second study conducted in patients with ER-positive tumors, showed, after 8 years, both a DFS and an overall survival advantage from TAM plus either MF or CMF over that achieved with TAM alone. A recent meta-analysis in women with negative lymph nodes and either ER-negative or ER-positive tumors of less than or equal to 1 cm in size was conducted using patients from five NSABP trials. After 8 years, the RFS in women with ER-negative tumors was greater in the group treated with surgery and chemotherapy than in those who underwent surgery alone. In women with ER-positive tumors, RFS and overall survival advantages were observed from the addition of chemotherapy to TAM when that treatment regimen was compared with TAM alone. In addition, evidence has been presented from NSABP B-21, a trial evaluating radiation therapy (XRT) and/or TAM for the prevention of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy in women with tumors less than or equal to 1 cm. Findings have shown that XRT is superior to TAM and that XRT + TAM is superior to XRT alone for preventing IBTR. The findings demonstrate that chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy is effective for the management of women with negative axillary lymph nodes and either ER-negative or ER-positive tumors. Because it also has been proven effective in women with tumors less than or equal to 1 cm, such therapy might also be considered in the treatment of that patient population.

Tamoxifen and breast cancer incidence among women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP-P1) Breast Cancer Prevention Trial

CONTEXT

Among cancer-free women aged 35 years or older, tamoxifen reduced the incidence of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive but not ER-negative breast cancer. The effect of tamoxifen on breast cancer incidence among women at extremely high risk due to inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of tamoxifen on incidence of breast cancer among cancer-free women with inherited BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Genomic analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 for 288 women who developed breast cancer after entry into the randomized, double-blind Breast Cancer Prevention Trial of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (between April 1, 1992, and September 30, 1999).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Among women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, incidence of breast cancer among those who were receiving tamoxifen vs incidence of breast cancer among those receiving placebo.

RESULTS

Of the 288 breast cancer cases, 19 (6.6%) inherited disease-predisposing BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Of 8 patients with BRCA1 mutations, 5 received tamoxifen and 3 received placebo (risk ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-10.70). Of 11 patients with BRCA2 mutations, 3 received tamoxifen and 8 received placebo (risk ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-1.56). From 10 studies, including this one, 83% of BRCA1 breast tumors were ER-negative, whereas 76% of BRCA2 breast tumors were ER-positive.

CONCLUSION

Tamoxifen reduced breast cancer incidence among healthy BRCA2 carriers by 62%, similar to the reduction in incidence of ER-positive breast cancer among all women in the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. In contrast, tamoxifen use beginning at age 35 years or older did not reduce breast cancer incidence among healthy women with inherited BRCA1 mutations. Whether tamoxifen use at a younger age would reduce breast cancer incidence among healthy women with BRCA1 mutations remains unknown.

Role of CD8(+) lymphocytes in control of simian immunodeficiency virus infection and resistance to rechallenge after transient early antiretroviral treatment

Transient antiretroviral treatment with tenofovir, (R)-9-(2-phosphonylmethoxypropyl)adenine, begun shortly after inoculation of rhesus macaques with the highly pathogenic simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) isolate SIVsmE660, facilitated the development of SIV-specific lymphoproliferative responses and sustained effective control of the infection following drug discontinuation. Animals that controlled plasma viremia following transient postinoculation treatment showed substantial resistance to subsequent intravenous rechallenge with homologous (SIVsmE660) and highly heterologous (SIVmac239) SIV isolates, up to more than 1 year later, despite the absence of measurable neutralizing antibody. In some instances, resistance to rechallenge was observed despite the absence of detectable SIV-specific binding antibody and in the face of SIV lymphoproliferative responses that were low or undetectable at the time of challenge. In vivo monoclonal antibody depletion experiments demonstrated a critical role for CD8(+) lymphocytes in the control of viral replication; plasma viremia rose by as much as five log units after depletion of CD8(+) cells and returned to predepletion levels (as low as <100 copy Eq/ml) as circulating CD8(+) cells were restored. The extent of host control of replication of highly pathogenic SIV strains and the level of resistance to heterologous rechallenge achieved following transient postinoculation treatment compared favorably to the results seen after SIVsmE660 and SIVmac239 challenge with many vaccine strategies. This impressive control of viral replication was observed despite comparatively modest measured immune responses, less than those often achieved with vaccination regimens. The results help establish the underlying feasibility of efforts to develop vaccines for the prevention of AIDS, although the exact nature of the protective host responses involved remains to be elucidated.

Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted two sequential randomized clinical trials to aid in resolving uncertainty about the treatment of women with small, localized, mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). After removal of the tumor and normal breast tissue so that specimen margins were histologically tumor-free (lumpectomy), 818 patients in the B-17 trial were randomly assigned to receive either radiation therapy to the ipsilateral breast or no radiation therapy. B-24, the second study, which involved 1,804 women, tested the hypothesis that, in DCIS patients with or without positive tumor specimen margins, lumpectomy, radiation, and tamoxifen (TAM) would be more effective than lumpectomy, radiation, and placebo in preventing invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs), contralateral breast tumors (CBTs), and tumors at metastatic sites. The findings in this report continue to demonstrate through 12 years of follow-up that radiation after lumpectomy reduces the incidence rate of all IBTRs by 58%. They also demonstrate that the administration of TAM after lumpectomy and radiation therapy results in a significant decrease in the rate of all breast cancer events, particularly in invasive cancer. The findings from the B-17 and B-24 studies are related to those from the NSABP prevention (P-1) trial, which demonstrated a 50% reduction in the risk of invasive cancer in women with a history of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and a reduction in the incidence of both DCIS and LCIS in women without a history of those tumors. The B-17 findings demonstrated that patients treated with lumpectomy alone were at greater risk for invasive cancer than were women in P-1 who had a history of ADH or LCIS and who received no radiation therapy or TAM. Although women who received radiation benefited from that therapy, they remained at higher risk for invasive cancer than women in P-1 who had a history of LCIS and who received placebo or TAM. Thus, if it is accepted from the P-1 findings that women at increased risk for invasive cancer are candidates for an intervention such as TAM, then it would seem that women with a history of DCIS should also be considered for such therapy in addition to radiation therapy. That statement does not imply that, as a result of the findings presented here, all DCIS patients should receive radiation and TAM. It does suggest, however, that, in the treatment of DCIS, the appropriate use of current and better therapeutic agents that become available could diminish the significance of breast cancer as a public health problem.

Phase II study of pemetrexed disodium, a multitargeted antifolate, and cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: a study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed disodium (Alimta [Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN], LY231514, multitargeted antifolate) is a new multitargeted antifolate agent that inhibits multiple enzymes in the folate pathway. Phase II trials showed single-agent response rates of 16% and 23% in untreated patients with nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). This study was undertaken to determine the response to pemetrexed disodium given in combination with cisplatin.

METHODS

Previously untreated patients were eligible if they had Stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, performance status 0, 1, or 2, adequate hematology and biochemistry and bidimensionally measurable lesions. Patients with brain metastases or neuropathy higher than Grade 2 were excluded. Pemetrexed disodium 500 mg/m(2) was given over 10 minutes, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) with hydration and mannitol diuresis was administered on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Dexamethasone 4 mg was taken orally once every 12 hours starting 24 hours before treatment and continuing for 6 doses after treatment. Four patients had detailed pemetrexed disodium pharmacokinetic analysis performed.

RESULTS

Between May 1998 and June 1999, 31 patients were treated on the study. There were 20 males and 11 females; median age was 60 years (range, 35-75 years); there were 5 Stage IIIB, 26 Stage IV, 26 performance status 0 or 1, and 5 performance status 2. In 29 patients evaluable for response, there were 13 partial responses (PRs; overall response rate [ORR], 95%; confidence interval [CI]: 26-64%) of median duration 6.1 months (1.6-7.8 months). Three of four evaluable patients with performance status 2 achieved PR, and 11 of 24 evaluable Stage IV patients responded (ORR, 45.8% in Stage IV). Eighteen patients died. The median survival rate was 8.9 months (range, 1-15+ months). A total of 160 courses were delivered (median, 6 for both cisplatin and pemetrexed disodium). Grade 3 and 4 anemia was observed in 5 and 1 patients, respectively, and Grade 3 and 4 granulocytopenia in 7 and 4 patients, respectively. Grade 3 nausea and emesis occurred in only 2 patients, Grade 3/4 diarrhea in 3 patients, and 2 patients had Grade 3 motor neuropathy. Nine patients had Grade 2 infections, and there was one case of febrile neutropenia. Pharmacokinetic results showed C(max), clearance and V(ss) values to be similar to data from single-agent pemetrexed disodium given in the same dose.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of pemetrexed disodium and cisplatin is active against advanced NSCLC and is a well-tolerated convenient outpatient regimen. It deserves further study to compare it with other standard regimens for NSCLC.

Preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer

The concept of using preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer originated from experimental and clinical observations, as well as from theoretical hypotheses on tumor cell growth and dissemination. Results from nonrandomized studies with different chemotherapeutic agents or combination regimens given preoperatively demonstrated substantial clinical response rates but low pathologic tumor response rates. In addition, several such studies were able to show that-by reducing primary breast tumor size-preoperative chemotherapy can lead to an increase in the rate of breast-preserving procedures. Although nonrandomized studies provided useful clinical information about the effect of preoperative chemotherapy on primary breast tumors and on axillary nodes involved with tumor, they could not address the relative efficacy of preoperative versus postoperative (adjuvant) chemotherapy on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). As a result, several randomized trials were implemented to address the above questions. Some of the earlier trials, however, were not designed as straightforward comparisons of preoperative versus postoperative chemotherapy and, thus, did not provide meaningful answers to the fundamental question of whether DFS and OS can be prolonged by the administration of chemotherapy before surgery rather than after. The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 trial was the largest randomized trial that aimed to compare preoperative to postoperative chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Results from this trial on the effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease and outcome are presented. The potential advantages and disadvantages of each approach, as well as surgical considerations and current and future directions in the use of preoperative chemotherapy, are also discussed.

Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted two sequential randomized clinical trials to aid in resolving uncertainty about the treatment of women with small, localized, mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). After removal of the tumor and normal breast tissue so that specimen margins were histologically tumor-free (lumpectomy), 818 patients in the B-17 trial were randomly assigned to receive either radiation therapy to the ipsilateral breast or no radiation therapy. B-24, the second study, which involved 1,804 women, tested the hypothesis that, in DCIS patients with or without positive tumor specimen margins, lumpectomy, radiation, and tamoxifen (TAM) would be more effective than lumpectomy, radiation, and placebo in preventing invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTRs), contralateral breast tumors (CBTs), and tumors at metastatic sites. The findings in this report continue to demonstrate through 12 years of follow-up that radiation after lumpectomy reduces the incidence rate of all IBTRs by 58%. They also demonstrate that the administration of TAM after lumpectomy and radiation therapy results in a significant decrease in the rate of all breast cancer events, particularly in invasive cancer. The findings from the B-17 and B-24 studies are related to those from the NSABP prevention (P-1) trial, which demonstrated a 50% reduction in the risk of invasive cancer in women with a history of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and a reduction in the incidence of both DCIS and LCIS in women without a history of those tumors. The B-17 findings demonstrated that patients treated with lumpectomy alone were at greater risk for invasive cancer than were women in P-1 who had a history of ADH or LCIS and who received no radiation therapy or TAM. Although women who received radiation benefited from that therapy, they remained at higher risk for invasive cancer than women in P-1 who had a history of LCIS and who received placebo or TAM. Thus, if it is accepted from the P-1 findings that women at increased risk for invasive cancer are candidates for an intervention such as TAM, then it would seem that women with a history of DCIS should also be considered for such therapy in addition to radiation therapy. That statement does not imply that, as a result of the findings presented here, all DCIS patients should receive radiation and TAM. It does suggest, however, that, in the treatment of DCIS, the appropriate use of current and better therapeutic agents that become available could diminish the significance of breast cancer as a public health problem.