Patients with Slowly Proliferative Early Breast Cancer Have Low Five-Year Recurrence Rates in a Phase III Adjuvant Trial of Capecitabine

Pharmacological approaches for targeting lysosomes to induce ferroptotic cell death in cancer

Lysosomes are crucial organelles responsible for the degradation of cytosolic materials and bulky organelles, thereby facilitating nutrient recycling and cell survival. However, lysosome also acts as an executioner of cell death, including ferroptosis, a distinctive form of regulated cell death that hinges on iron-dependent phospholipid peroxidation. The initiation of ferroptosis necessitates three key components: substrates (membrane phospholipids enriched with polyunsaturated fatty acids), triggers (redox-active irons), and compromised defence mechanisms (GPX4-dependent and -independent antioxidant systems). Notably, iron assumes a pivotal role in ferroptotic cell death, particularly in the context of cancer, where iron and oncogenic signaling pathways reciprocally reinforce each other. Given the lysosomes' central role in iron metabolism, various strategies have been devised to harness lysosome-mediated iron metabolism to induce ferroptosis. These include the re-mobilization of iron from intracellular storage sites such as ferritin complex and mitochondria through ferritinophagy and mitophagy, respectively. Additionally, transcriptional regulation of lysosomal and autophagy genes by TFEB enhances lysosomal function. Moreover, the induction of lysosomal iron overload can lead to lysosomal membrane permeabilization and subsequent cell death. Extensive screening and individually studies have explored pharmacological interventions using clinically available drugs and phytochemical agents. Furthermore, a drug delivery system involving ferritin-coated nanoparticles has been specifically tailored to target cancer cells overexpressing TFRC. With the rapid advancements in understandings the mechanistic underpinnings of ferroptosis and iron metabolism, it is increasingly evident that lysosomes represent a promising target for inducing ferroptosis and combating cancer.

Capecitabine-based chemotherapy in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Introduction

The efficacy and safety of adjuvant capecitabine in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer remains undefined. A meta-analysis was conducted to elucidate whether capecitabine-based regimens could improve survival in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Methods

The current study searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov proceedings up to 2023.9. Disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) were assessed. Extracted or calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled.

Results

The capecitabine-based regimens showed significant advantages in DFS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.73-0.90; P <.001) and OS (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87; P <.001) from 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 5,390 unselected participants. Subgroup analysis of DFS showed analogous results derived from patients with lymph node negative (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.50-0.92; P = .006) and capecitabine duration no less than six cycles (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.62-0.86; P <.001). Improvement of DFS in the addition group (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.68-0.87; P <.001) and adjuvant setting (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70-0.89; P <.001) was observed. As to safety profile, capecitabine was associated with more frequent stomatitis (OR = 5.05, 95% CI: 1.45-17.65, P = .011), diarrhea (OR = 6.11, 95% CI: 2.12-17.56; P =.001), and hand-foot syndrome (OR = 31.82, 95% CI: 3.23-313.65, P = .003).

Conclusions

Adjuvant capecitabine-based chemotherapy provided superior DFS and OS to early-stage TNBC. The benefits to DFS in selected patients with lymph node negative and the addition and extended duration of capecitabine were demonstrated.

Triple-Negative PAM50 Non-Basal Breast Cancer Subtype Predicts Benefit from Extended Adjuvant Capecitabine

PURPOSE

Predictive biomarkers for capecitabine benefit in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) have been recently proposed using samples from phase III clinical trials, including non-basal phenotype and biomarkers related to angiogenesis, stroma, and capecitabine activation genes. We aimed to validate these findings on the larger phase III GEICAM/CIBOMA clinical trial.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Tumor tissues from patients with TNBC randomized to standard (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy followed by capecitabine versus observation were analyzed using a 164-gene NanoString custom nCounter codeset measuring mRNA expression. A prespecified statistical plan sought to verify the predictive capacity of PAM50 non-basal molecular subtype and tested the hypotheses that breast tumors with increased expression of (meta)genes for cytotoxic cells, mast cells, endothelial cells, PDL2, and 38 individual genes benefit from adjuvant capecitabine for distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS; primary endpoint) and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 876 women enrolled in the GEICAM/CIBOMA trial, 658 (75%) were evaluable for analysis (337 with capecitabine and 321 without). Of these cases, 553 (84%) were profiled as PAM50 basal-like whereas 105 (16%) were PAM50 non-basal. Non-basal subtype was the most significant predictor for capecitabine benefit [HRcapecitabine, 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.07-0.54; P < 0.001] when compared with PAM50 basal-like (HRcapecitabine, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.63-1.28; P = 0.55; Pinteraction<0.001, adjusted P value = 0.01). Analysis of biological processes related to PAM50 non-basal subtype revealed its enrichment for mast cells, extracellular matrix, angiogenesis, and features of mesenchymal stem-like TNBC subtype.

CONCLUSIONS

In this prespecified correlative analysis of the GEICAM/CIBOMA trial, PAM50 non-basal status identified patients with early-stage TNBC most likely to benefit from capecitabine.

Neoadjuvant docetaxel and capecitabine (TX) versus docetaxel and epirubicin (TE) for locally advanced or early her2-negative breast cancer: an open-label, randomized, multi-center, phase II Trial

PURPOSE

The combination of taxanes and anthracyclines is still the mainstay of chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Capecitabine is an active drug with a favorable toxicity profile, showing strong anti-tumor activity against metastatic breast cancer. This trial assessed the efficacy and safety of the TX regimen (docetaxel and capecitabine) and compared it with the TE (docetaxel and epirubicin) regimen in locally advanced or high risk early HER2-negative breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted at five academic centers in China. Eligible female patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the TX (docetaxel 75 mg/m² d1 plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m² twice d1-14, q3w) or TE (docetaxel 75 mg/m² d1 plus epirubicin 75 mg/m² d1, q3w) groups for four cycles. The primary endpoint was a pathological complete response in the breast (pCR). Secondary endpoints included pCR in the breast and axilla, invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Between September 1, 2012, and December 31, 2018, 113 HER2-negative patients were randomly assigned to the study groups (TX: n = 54; TE: n = 59). In the primary endpoint analysis, 14 patients in the TX group achieved a pCR, and nine patients in the TE group achieved a pCR (25.9% vs. 15.3%), with a not significant difference of 10.6% (95% CI -6.0-27.3%; P = 0.241). In a subgroup with high Ki-67 score, TX increased the pCR rate by 24.2% (95% CI 2.2-46.1%; P = 0.029). At the end of the 69-month median follow-up period, both groups had equivalent iDFS and OS rates. TX was associated with a higher incidence of hand-foot syndrome and less alopecia, with a manageable toxicity profile.

CONCLUSION

The anthracycline-free TX regimen yielded comparable pCR and long-term survival rates to the TE regimen. Thus, this anthracycline-free regimen could be considered in selected patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12613000206729 on 21/02/2013, retrospectively registered.

Addition of Capecitabine to Adjuvant Chemotherapy May be the Most Effective Strategy for Patients With Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of 9 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Previous studies determined the therapeutic effects of capecitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the optimal strategy of capecitabine-based chemotherapy remains uncertain. We conducted this network meta-analysis to address this issue.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to retrieve eligible studies published before September 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted information from eligible studies using a pre-designed data extraction sheet. The primary outcome included disease-free survival, and the second outcome showed overall survival and adverse events. Direct meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4, and Bayesian network analysis was performed using R version 3.6.1 with the "gemtc" and "rjags" packages.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 3661 TNBC patients met the selection criteria. The network meta-analysis suggested that the addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy achieved a significantly longer disease-free (HR = 0.66, 95% CrI = 0.49 to 0.86) and overall survival time (HR = 0.60, 95% CrI = 0.43 to 0.83) than standard chemotherapy. All comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. The addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective treatment for improving disease-free (81.24%) and overall survival (78.46%) times, and the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available evidence, capecitabine-based chemotherapy benefits TNBC patients, and the addition of capecitabine with adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective regime. In contrast, the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime. More studies of high quality and large scale are needed to confirm our findings.

Efficacy and Safety of Capecitabine for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most aggressive subtype of breast cancer with limited treatment options and poor prognosis. Capecitabine, as a novel adjuvant chemotherapy for TNBCs, remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of capecitabine for early-stage TNBCs combined with neo-/adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases updated on Mar 18, 2022 for relevant RCTs. In all, 11 RCTs with 5,175 patients were included. We used hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) to assess the differences between disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events.

Results

Our study demonstrated significance differences in both DFS and OS (DFS: HR=0.77; 95% CI 0.68–0.86; OS: HR=0.73, 95% CI 0.63–0.85). In subgroup analysis, the lower dosage group showed higher DFS (HR=0.79, 95% CI 0.69–0.91), higher frequency (HR=0.72, 95%CI 0.62–0.83), and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.74, 95% CI 0.65–0.84). However, capecitabine was also associated with a higher risk of diarrhea (OR=3.10, 95% CI 2.32–4.15), hand–foot syndrome (OR=25.79, 95% CI 15.32–43.42), and leukopenia (OR=2.08, 95% CI 1.13–3.84).

Conclusion

The addition of capecitabine to early-stage TNBC patients receiving standard adjuvant chemotherapy showed significant DFS and OS improvement with tolerable adverse events. The lower dosage and higher frequency of capecitabine combined with adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a better survival outcome.

Adjuvant Capecitabine for Early Breast Cancer: 15-Year Overall Survival Results From a Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

Few data are available regarding the influence of adjuvant capecitabine on long-term survival of patients with early breast cancer.

METHODS

The Finland Capecitabine Trial (FinXX) is a randomized, open-label, multicenter trial that evaluates integration of capecitabine to an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen containing a taxane and an anthracycline for the treatment of early breast cancer. Between January 27, 2004, and May 29, 2007, 1,500 patients with axillary node-positive or high-risk node-negative early breast cancer were accrued. The patients were randomly allocated to either TX-CEX, consisting of three cycles of docetaxel (T) plus capecitabine (X) followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and capecitabine (CEX, 753 patients), or to T-CEF, consisting of three cycles of docetaxel followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF, 747 patients). We performed a protocol-scheduled analysis of overall survival on the basis of approximately 15-year follow-up of the patients.

RESULTS

The data collection was locked on December 31, 2020. By this date, the median follow-up time of the patients alive was 15.3 years (interquartile range, 14.5-16.1 years) in the TX-CEX group and 15.4 years (interquartile range, 14.8-16.0 years) in the T-CEF group. Patients assigned to TX-CEX survived longer than those assigned to T-CEF (hazard ratio 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.99; P = .037). The 15-year survival rate was 77.6% in the TX-CEX group and 73.3% in the T-CEF group. In exploratory subgroup analyses, patients with estrogen receptor-negative cancer and those with triple-negative cancer treated with TX-CEX tended to live longer than those treated with T-CEF.

CONCLUSION

Addition of capecitabine to a chemotherapy regimen that contained docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide prolonged the survival of patients with early breast cancer.

Effects of capecitabine as part of neo-/adjuvant chemotherapy - A meta-analysis of individual breast cancer patient data from 13 randomised trials including 15,993 patients

BACKGROUND

Despite the large number of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) who have been treated with capecitabine in randomised trials, no individual patient data meta-analysis has been conducted. The primary objective was to examine the effect of capecitabine on disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary objectives were to analyse distant DFS (DDFS), overall survival (OS), pathological complete response (for neoadjuvant studies) and the interaction between capecitabine-related toxicity and treatment effect.

METHODS

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov and www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov were searched using the following criteria: use of capecitabine for EBC as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy; multicentre randomised trial with >100 patients; recruitment completed, and outcomes available. Required data were available for 13 trials.

RESULTS

Individual data from 15,993 patients were collected. Cox regression analyses of all included patients revealed that the addition of capecitabine did not alter DFS significantly compared with treatment without capecitabine (hazard ratio [HR] 0.952; 95% CI 0.895-1.012; P value = 0.115). There was also no effect on DFS in the subset of studies where capecitabine was given instead of another drug (HR 1.035; 95% CI 0.945-1.134; P = 0.455). However, capecitabine administered in addition to the standard systemic treatment improved DFS (HR 0.888; 95% CI 0.817-0.965; P = 0.005). An OS improvement was observed in the entire cohort (HR 0.892; 95% CI 0.824-0.965, P = 0.005) and in the subset of capecitabine addition (HR 0.837; 95% CI 0.751, 0.933, P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients benefitted from treatment with capecitabine overall and in addition to other systemic treatments in terms of DFS and OS.

CONCLUSION

Capecitabine was able to improve DFS and OS in patients with TNBC and in all patients with EBC when administered in addition to systemic treatment.

Additional capecitabine use in early-stage triple negative breast cancer patients receiving standard chemotherapy: a new era? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The efficiency of capecitabine has been proven in early-stage triple negative breast cancer (eTNBC) with residue invasive tumor (non-pCR) after standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). However, for those unselected eTNBC patients without screening from NACT (i.e., newly diagnosed eTNBC patients undergoing breast surgery followed by adjuvant systemic therapy), the value of capecitabine has still remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate whether additional capecitabine in eTNBC patients could improve clinical outcomes.

Methods

Seven RCTs (USO 01062, FinXX, GEICAM/2003, CREATE-X, CIBOMA/2004, CBCSG-010 and SYSUCC-001) were identified in online databases until December 2020 and included in the meta-analysis. We extracted the survival data including disease/relapse-free survival (DFS/RFS) and overall survival (OS), and utilized the STATA software to calculate the summarized hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs).

Results

A total of 3329 eTNBC patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis, with 1640 receiving standard neo−/adjuvant chemo-regimes alone, and the other 1689 receiving an additional capecitabine use, respectively. Both DFS and OS were significantly improved with the addition of capecitabine, and the benefits remained consistent in those unselected eTNBC patients without screening from NACT. Subgroup analysis further proved that this improvement in DFS was significant in both nodal negative and positive patients. Similar benefits are also found across menopausal status (both pre- and post-menopause). Regarding toxicity, the hand-foot syndrome and neutropenia are the most common capecitabine related adverse events, and are mostly tolerable.

Conclusions

The present meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates for the first time that adding capecitabine to standard chemo-regimens could improve both DFS and OS in unselected eTNBC patients, and this benefit remains consistent regardless of nodal status and menopausal status, which may lead eTNBC therapy into a new era.

Efficacy of Sequential Capecitabine on Adjuvant Chemotherapy of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

This paper aims to evaluate the efficacy of capecitabine as extended adjuvant treatment after anthracycline and paclitaxel combined adjuvant chemotherapy for women with early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The patients with early TNBC were randomly assigned to capecitabine sequential treatment for 4 cycles and without any sequential treatment in the control group after anthracycline and paclitaxel combined adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary end point was overall survival (OS). One hundred patients were enrolled in this study between June 2013 and February 2015. Median age was 49 years ranging from 25 to 66 years and treatment was well tolerance. The median follow-up time after random allocation was 58 months (range: 11–62 months). There was no significant difference in DFS and OS between the two groups (hazard ratio (HR) of DFS was 0.50; 95% CI, 0.24–1.05; P=0.066). Our study shows that although the addition of four cycles capecitabine after anthracycline and paclitaxel combining adjuvant chemotherapy does not improve DFS and OS, but the trend of DFS is improved. The possible reason is that the four-cycle treatment of capecitabine is not enough, and another possible reason is that the number of cases is not enough.

The Clinical Value of Chemotherapy Combined With Capecitabine in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer-A Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most dangerous subtype of breast cancer with high rates of metastasis and recurrence. The efficacy of capecitabine in chemotherapy for TNBC is still controversial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of capecitabine combining with standard, adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for TNBC.

Methods: We systematically searched clinical studies through PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Wanfang Database, China Academic Journals (CNKI), and American Society of Clinical Oncology’s (ASCO) annual conference report. Studies were assessed for design and quality by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager to quantify the effect of capecitabine combined with standard, adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate of TNBC patients. Furthermore, safety analysis was performed to evaluate the adverse events.

Results: Twelve randomized controlled clinical trials involving totally 4854 TNBC patients were included, of which 2,214 patients received chemotherapy as control group, and 2,278 patients received capecitabine combining with chemotherapy. The results indicated that capecitabine could significantly improve the DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–0.90, P = 0.0003] and OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74–0.93, P = 0.001). In subgroup analysis, the combination of capecitabine and cyclophosphamide exhibited a significant benefit in all outcomes (DFS HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63–0.90, P = 0.002; OS HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52–0.80, p < 0.0001). Additionally, defferent dose of capecitabine subgroup showed same significant effect on the results. Safety analysis showed that the addition of capecitabine was associated with a much higher risk of hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea and mucositis or stomatitis.

Conclusion: The results showed that adjuvant capecitabine could bring significant benefits on DFS and OS to unselected TNBC patients, the combination of capecitabine and cyclophosphamide could improve the survival rate of patients, although the addition of capecitabine could bring significant side effects such as hand foot syndrome (HFS) and diarrhea.

Treatment landscape of triple-negative breast cancer - expanded options, evolving needs

Tumour heterogeneity and a long-standing paucity of effective therapies other than chemotherapy have contributed to triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) being the subtype with the least favourable outcomes. In the past few years, advances in omics technologies have shed light on the relevance of the TNBC microenvironment heterogeneity, unveiling a close dynamic relationship with cancer cell features. An improved understanding of tumour-immune system co-evolution supports the need to adopt a more comprehensive view of TNBC as an ecosystem that encompasses the intrinsic and extrinsic features of cancer cells. This new appreciation of the biology of TNBC has already led to the development of novel targeted agents, including PARP inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates and immune-checkpoint inhibitors, which are revolutionizing the therapeutic landscape and providing new opportunities both for patients with early-stage TNBC and for those with advanced-stage disease. The current therapeutic scenario is only the tip of the iceberg, as hundreds of new compounds and combinations are in development. The translation of these experimental therapies into clinical benefit is a welcome and ongoing challenge. In this Review, we describe the current and upcoming therapeutic landscape of TNBC and discuss how an integrated view of the TNBC ecosystem can define different levels of risk and provide improved opportunities for tailoring treatment.

Additional adjuvant capecitabine in early breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aims: To assess the efficacy and safety of adjuvant capecitabine in early breast cancer patients. Methods: A literature search of databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials reporting the efficacy and toxicity of capecitabine as adjuvant therapy in early breast cancer patients. Results: Six studies were eligible and included a total of 6941 patients. Disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.71-0.88; p < 0.0001) was significantly improved with additional capecitabine, whereas improvement in overall survival (OS) was not significant. The more pronounced benefits in both disease-free survival and OS were observed among triple-negative breast cancer patients. Conclusion: Additional capecitabine in the adjuvant setting conferred substantial disease-free survival benefit and a tendency toward improved OS. Triple-negative breast cancer patients can benefit from capecitabine irrespective of the administration sequence. Capecitabine may be considered a preferred additional treatment for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients, and sequential capecitabine can serve as an alternative choice for patients with poor tolerance.

Capecitabine for hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this differential activity extends to early breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials looking at chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine alone or in combination with other agents versus a control or similar regimen without capecitabine for treatment of breast cancer at any stage. The primary outcome measure for metastatic and adjuvant trials was overall survival (OS), and for neoadjuvant studies pathological complete response (pCR).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived for time-to-event outcomes, and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, and meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 studies with outcome data by hormone receptor: 12 metastatic studies (n = 4325), 6 neoadjuvant trials (n = 3152), and 8 adjuvant studies (n = 13,457). Capecitabine treatment was added in several different ways across studies. These could be classified as capecitabine alone compared to another treatment, capecitabine substituted for part of the control chemotherapy, and capecitabine added to control chemotherapy. In the metastatic setting, the effect of capecitabine was heterogenous between hormone receptor-positive and -negative tumours. For OS, no difference between capecitabine-containing and non-capecitabine-containing regimens was observed for all participants taken together (HR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.05; 12 studies, 4325 participants; high-certainty evidence), for those with hormone receptor-positive disease (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 7 studies, 1834 participants; high-certainty evidence), and for those with hormone receptor-negative disease (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; 8 studies, 1577 participants; high-certainty evidence). For progression-free survival (PFS), a small improvement was seen for all people (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96; 12 studies, 4325 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This was largely accounted for by a moderate improvement in PFS for inclusion of capecitabine in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.91; 7 studies, 1594 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to no difference in PFS for hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.10; 7 studies, 1122 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life was assessed in five studies; in general there did not seem to be differences in global health scores between the two treatment groups at around two years' follow-up. Neoadjuvant studies were highly variable in design, having been undertaken to test various experimental regimens using pathological complete response (pCR) as a surrogate for disease-free survival (DFS) and OS. Across all patients, capecitabine-containing regimens resulted in little difference in pCR in comparison to non-capecitabine-containing regimens (odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.33; 6 studies, 3152 participants; high-certainty evidence). By subtype, no difference in pCR was observed for either hormone receptor-positive (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.95; 4 studies, 964 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or hormone receptor-negative tumours (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.66; 4 studies, 646 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Four studies with 2460 people reported longer-term outcomes: these investigators detected no difference in either DFS (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21; high-certainty evidence) or OS (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.23; high-certainty evidence). In the adjuvant setting, a modest improvement in OS was observed across all participants (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; 8 studies, 13,547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and no difference in OS was seen in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; 3 studies, 3683 participants), whereas OS improved in hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89; 5 studies, 3432 participants). No difference in DFS or relapse-free survival (RFS) was observed across all participants (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; 8 studies, 13,457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). As was observed for OS, no difference in DFS/RFS was seen in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17; 5 studies, 5604 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and improvements in DFS/RFS with inclusion of capecitabine were observed for hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.86; 7 studies, 3307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects were reported across all three scenarios. When grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was considered, no difference was seen for capecitabine compared to non-capecitabine regimens in neoadjuvant studies (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.77; 4 studies, 2890 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and a marked reduction was seen for capecitabine in adjuvant studies (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64; 5 studies, 8086 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was an increase in diarrhoea and hand-foot syndrome in neoadjuvant (diarrhoea: OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.89; 3 studies, 2686 participants; hand-foot syndrome: OR 6.77, 95% CI 4.89 to 9.38; 5 studies, 3021 participants; both moderate-certainty evidence) and adjuvant trials (diarrhoea: OR 2.46, 95% CI 2.01 to 3.01; hand-foot syndrome: OR 13.60, 95% CI 10.65 to 17.37; 8 studies, 11,207 participants; moderate-certainty evidence for both outcomes).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In summary, a moderate PFS benefit by including capecitabine was seen only in hormone receptor-positive cancers in metastatic studies. No benefit of capecitabine for pCR was noted overall or in hormone receptor subgroups when included in neoadjuvant therapy. In contrast, the addition of capecitabine in the adjuvant setting led to improved outcomes for OS and DFS in hormone receptor-negative cancer. Future studies should stratify by hormone receptor and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) status to clarify the differential effects of capecitabine in these subgroups across all treatment scenarios, to optimally guide capecitabine inclusion.

Updated Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) in Adjuvant Breast Cancer Clinical Trials: STEEP Version 2.0

PURPOSE

The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007, provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer clinical trial end points. Given the evolution of breast cancer clinical trials and improvements in outcomes, a panel of experts reviewed the STEEP criteria to determine whether modifications are needed.

METHODS

We conducted systematic searches of ClinicalTrials.gov for adjuvant systemic and local-regional therapy trials for breast cancer to investigate if the primary end points reported met STEEP criteria. On the basis of common STEEP deviations, we performed a series of simulations to evaluate the effect of excluding non-breast cancer deaths and new nonbreast primary cancers from the invasive disease-free survival end point.

RESULTS

Among 11 phase III breast cancer trials with primary efficacy end points, three had primary end points that followed STEEP criteria, four used STEEP definitions but not the corresponding end point names, and four used end points that were not included in the original STEEP manuscript. Simulation modeling demonstrated that inclusion of second nonbreast primary cancer can increase the probability of incorrect inferences, can decrease power to detect clinically relevant efficacy effects, and may mask differences in recurrence rates, especially when recurrence rates are low.

CONCLUSION

We recommend an additional end point, invasive breast cancer-free survival, which includes all invasive disease-free survival events except second nonbreast primary cancers. This end point should be considered for trials in which the toxicities of agents are well-known and where the risk of second primary cancer is small. Additionally, we provide end point recommendations for local therapy trials, low-risk populations, noninferiority trials, and trials incorporating patient-reported outcomes.

The role of capecitabine-based neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of capecitabine in neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is highly controversial. Our meta-analysis was designed to further elucidate the effects of capecitabine on survival in early-stage TNBC patients and its safety.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and papers presented at several main conferences were searched up to December 19, 2019, to investigate capecitabine-based versus capecitabine-free neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in TNBC patients. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 test, combined with hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) computed for disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and over grade 3 adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

A total of 9 randomized clinical trials and 3842 TNBC patients were included. Overall, the combined capecitabine regimens in neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy showed significantly improved DFS (HR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86; P < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.77; P < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, there were improvements in DFS in the groups with addition of capecitabine (HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.78; P < 0.001), adjuvant chemotherapy (HR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.63-0.85; P < 0.001), and lymph node positivity (HR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44-0.86; P = 0.005). Capecitabine regimens were related to higher risks of diarrhea (OR = 2.88, 95% CI 2.23-3.74, P < 0.001), stomatitis (OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.53-2.64, P < 0.001) and hand-foot syndrome (OR = 8.67, 95% CI 6.70-11.22, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy combined with capecitabine significantly improved both DFS and OS in early-stage TNBC patients with tolerable AEs. There were benefits to DFS in the groups with the addition of capecitabine, adjuvant chemotherapy, and lymph node positivity.

Effect of Capecitabine Maintenance Therapy Using Lower Dosage and Higher Frequency vs Observation on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Who Had Received Standard Treatment: The SYSUCC-001 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Among all subtypes of breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer has a relatively high relapse rate and poor outcome after standard treatment. Effective strategies to reduce the risk of relapse and death are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of low-dose capecitabine maintenance after standard adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial conducted at 13 academic centers and clinical sites in China from April 2010 to December 2016 and final date of follow-up was April 30, 2020. Patients (n = 443) had early-stage triple-negative breast cancer and had completed standard adjuvant chemotherapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive capecitabine (n = 222) at a dose of 650 mg/m2 twice a day by mouth for 1 year without interruption or to observation (n = 221) after completion of standard adjuvant chemotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included distant disease-free survival, overall survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 443 women who were randomized, 434 were included in the full analysis set (mean [SD] age, 46 [9.9] years; T1/T2 stage, 93.1%; node-negative, 61.8%) (98.0% completed the trial). After a median follow-up of 61 months (interquartile range, 44-82), 94 events were observed, including 38 events (37 recurrences and 32 deaths) in the capecitabine group and 56 events (56 recurrences and 40 deaths) in the observation group. The estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 82.8% in the capecitabine group and 73.0% in the observation group (hazard ratio [HR] for risk of recurrence or death, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.42-0.95]; P = .03). In the capecitabine group vs the observation group, the estimated 5-year distant disease-free survival was 85.8% vs 75.8% (HR for risk of distant metastasis or death, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.38-0.92]; P = .02), the estimated 5-year overall survival was 85.5% vs 81.3% (HR for risk of death, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.47-1.19]; P = .22), and the estimated 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival was 85.0% vs 80.8% (HR for risk of locoregional recurrence or death, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.46-1.13]; P = .15). The most common capecitabine-related adverse event was hand-foot syndrome (45.2%), with 7.7% of patients experiencing a grade 3 event.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among women with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer who received standard adjuvant treatment, low-dose capecitabine maintenance therapy for 1 year, compared with observation, resulted in significantly improved 5-year disease-free survival.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01112826.

Comparison of capecitabine-based regimens with platinum-based regimens in Chinese triple-negative breast cancer patients with liver metastasis

Background

Capecitabine-based chemotherapy (CBC) presents potential value in patients with liver metastasis; platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) has shown promising benefit in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). For TNBC patients with liver metastasis, which treatment strategy is better remains to be further studied. The aim of this study was to report the first real-world data evaluating the efficacy and safety of PBC versus CBC in the first-line treatment in Chinese TNBC patients with liver metastasis.

Methods

TNBC patients with liver metastasis pretreated with anthracyclines/taxanes in 4 institutions of China between January 2010 and December 2019 were included. Objective response rate (ORR), overall survival, treatment pattern, and toxicity profile were assessed between PBC and CBC groups.

Results

A total of 59 TNBC patients with liver metastasis were identified. Among these, 33 were treated with PBC and 26 were treated with CBC. The ORR was higher in the CBC group than in the PBC group (57.7% versus 30.3%, P=0.035). Median overall survival was also greatly improved (19.2 versus 14.4 months, P=0.041). Docetaxel/cisplatin was more likely to be used for PBC, and paclitaxel/capecitabine was the main regimen for CBC. Multivariable Cox regression analysis indicated that CBC was an independent predictor for overall survival after adjustment for baseline factors including age, tumor size, nodal status, prior anthracyclines/taxanes use, and tumor grade (odds ratio =0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.98; P=0.042). Adverse events were not different except gastrointestinal tract toxicities, hand-foot syndrome and hematologic toxicity.

Conclusions

For TNBC patients with liver metastasis, capecitabin-based chemotherapy might be more suitable than the platinum-based regimen in the first-line treatment, as measured by objective response rate and overall survival. Further large-scale studies are warranted.

A review of current progress in triple-negative breast cancer therapy

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a particularly aggressive subtype known for its extremely high drug resistance, progression, poor prognosis, and lack of clear therapeutic targets. Researchers are aiming to advance TNBC treatment worldwide. In the past 2–3 years, more positive results have emerged in the clinical research on TNBC treatment. Based on the results, several impressive drugs have been approved to benefit patients with TNBC, including the PARP inhibitors olaparib and talazoparib for germline BRCA mutation-associated breast cancer (gBRCAm-BC) and immunotherapy using the checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel for programmed cell death-ligand 1-positive (PD-L1+) advanced TNBC. Although neoadjuvant therapy has focused on combinations of systemic agents to optimize pathologically complete response, metastatic TNBC still has a poor prognosis. Innovative multidrug combination systemic therapies based on neoadjuvants and adjuvants have led to significant improvements in outcomes, particularly over the past decade.

Capecitabine + Epirubicin + Cyclophosphamide Combination Therapy (CEX Therapy) as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for HER-2-Negative Breast Cancer: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND

We modified and administered capecitabine + epirubicin + cyclophosphamide combination therapy (CEX) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for HER-2-negative breast cancer and retrospectively analyzed its effectiveness and tolerability at our center.

METHODS

The inclusion criteria were presence of breast cancer negative for HER-2 and positive lymph node metastasis, or negative lymph node metastasis when tumor diameter was 20 mm or greater without distant metastasis. Additional inclusion criteria were a performance status of 0 or 1, an EF >60%, and an age of 75 years or less. Clinical outcomes were evaluated after 4 courses of epirubicin 80 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 (administered every 3 weeks), and capecitabine 1,500 mg/m2 (administered for 2 weeks and withdrawn for 1 week).

RESULTS

A clinical benefit was noted in all 18 patients who received CEX as neoadjuvant chemotherapy during the period from 2009 through 2013. The clinical response rate was 83.3% (15/18), and the clinical complete response rate was 50%. Aesthetic outcomes of breast-conserving surgery were positive in all patients. Among patients with satisfactory outcomes, 33.3% had a pathologic complete response (triple-negative: 6, luminal: 0) and 68.8% were n0 (triple-negative: 8, luminal: 3). All patients with a pathologic complete response are presently alive, free of recurrence, and currently undergoing follow-up. Adverse events were classified as grade 2 or lower in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CEX therapy administered as neoadjuvant chemotherapy could be useful for individualized treatment. In particular, this regimen was effective for triple-negative breast cancer.

Adjuvant Capecitabine With Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide Plus Epirubicin for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (CBCSG010): An Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

Standard adjuvant chemotherapy for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) includes a taxane and an anthracycline. Concomitant capecitabine may be beneficial, but robust data to support this are lacking. The efficacy and safety of the addition of capecitabine into the TNBC adjuvant treatment regimen was evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomized, open-label, phase III trial was conducted in China. Eligible female patients with early TNBC after definitive surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to either capecitabine (3 cycles of capecitabine and docetaxel followed by 3 cycles of capecitabine, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide) or control treatment (3 cycles of docetaxel followed by 3 cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide). Randomization was centralized without stratification. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Between June 2012 and December 2013, 636 patients with TNBC were screened, and 585 were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 288; capecitabine, 297). Median follow-up was 67 months. The 5-year DFS rate was higher for capecitabine than for control treatment (86.3% v 80.4%; hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.99; P = .044). Five-year overall survival rates were numerically higher but not significantly improved (capecitabine, 93.3%; control, 90.7%). Overall, 39.1% of patients had capecitabine dose reductions, and 8.4% reported grade ≥ 3 hand-foot syndrome. The most common grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (capecitabine, 136 [45.8%]; control, 118 [41.0%]) and febrile neutropenia (capecitabine, 50 [16.8%]; control, 46 [16.0%]). Safety data were similar to the known capecitabine safety profile and generally comparable between arms.

CONCLUSION

Capecitabine when added to 3 cycles of docetaxel followed by 3 cycles of a 3-drug anthracycline combination containing capecitabine instead of fluorouracil significantly improved DFS in TNBC without new safety concerns.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer, 2018 edition

Purpose

We present the English version of The Japanese Breast Cancer Society (JBCS) Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer, 2018 edition.

Methods

The JBCS formed a task force to update the JBCS Clinical Practice Guidelines, 2015 edition, according to Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. First, we set multiple outcomes for each clinical question (CQ). Next, quantitative or qualitative systematic review was conducted for each of the multiple outcomes, and the strength of recommendation for the CQ was taken into consideration during meetings, with the aim of finding a balance between benefit and harm. Finalized recommendations from each session were confirmed through discussion and voting at the recommendation decision meeting.

Results

The recommendations, the strength of recommendation and the strength of evidence were determined based on systemic literature reviews and the meta-analyses for each CQ.

Conclusion

The JBCS updated the Clinical Practice Guidelines for systemic treatment of breast cancer.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12282-020-01085-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Predictive Biomarkers for Adjuvant Capecitabine Benefit in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the FinXX Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Recent studies have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant capecitabine in early breast cancer, particularly in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, TNBC is heterogeneous and more precise predictive biomarkers are needed.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Tumor tissues collected from TNBC patients in the FinXX trial, randomized to adjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy with or without capecitabine, were analyzed using a 770-gene panel targeting multiple biological mechanisms and additional 30-custom genes related to capecitabine metabolism. Hypothesis-generating exploratory analyses were performed to assess biomarker expression in relation to treatment effect using the Cox regression model and interaction tests adjusted for multiplicity.

RESULTS

One hundred eleven TNBC samples were evaluable (57 without capecitabine and 54 with capecitabine). The median follow-up was 10.2 years. Multivariate analysis showed significant improvement in recurrence-free survival (RFS) favoring capecitabine in four biologically important genes and metagenes, including cytotoxic cells [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.38; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.16-0.86, P-interaction = 0.01], endothelial (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.20-2.22, P-interaction = 0.02), mast cells (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.27, P-interaction = 0.04), and PDL2 (HR = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.81, P-interaction = 0.03). Furthermore, we identified 38 single genes that were significantly associated with capecitabine benefit, and these were dominated by immune response pathway and enzymes involved in activating capecitabine to fluorouracil, including TYMP. However, these results were not significant when adjusted for multiple testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Genes and metagenes related to antitumor immunity, immune response, and capecitabine activation could identify TNBC patients who are more likely to benefit from adjuvant capecitabine. Given the reduced power to observe significant findings when correcting for multiplicity, our findings provide the basis for future hypothesis-testing validation studies on larger clinical trials.

Adjuvant addition of capecitabine to early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients receiving standard chemotherapy: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) pertains to a breast cancer subtype that has the highest metastatic and recurrence rates. The effectiveness of capecitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for TNBC has remained unclear. This study conducted a meta-analysis of the efficacy of capecitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC treated with taxane-/anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

We identified relevant research reports in online databases until May 2019. We finally included seven randomized clinical trials to perform this meta-analysis. Altogether, the seven trials enrolled 3151 early-stage TNBC patients, with 1552 receiving standard (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy regimens and 1599 receiving addition of capecitabine in the adjuvant settings besides standard regimens.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis of the seven trials revealed a significant increase in disease-free survival (DFS) with the addition of capecitabine (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.90). This improvement in DFS was significant both in trials conducted in America-Europe and in Asia. In trials involving six to eight cycles of capecitabine addition, we observed a significant improvement in DFS. Furthermore, in the meta-analysis of six trials, we detected a significant increase in overall survival (OS) favoring capecitabine (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant addition of capecitabine to early-stage TNBC patients receiving standard chemotherapy showed significant DFS and OS improvement. Future studies involving the selection of patients that may have the highest survival benefit from adding capecitabine are warranted.

Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Capecitabine After Standard Neo-/Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (GEICAM/2003-11_CIBOMA/2004-01)

PURPOSE

Operable triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) have a higher risk of relapse than non-TNBCs with standard therapy. The GEICAM/2003-11_CIBOMA/2004-01 trial explored extended adjuvant capecitabine after completion of standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were those with operable, node-positive—or node negative with tumor 1 cm or greater—TNBC, with prior anthracycline- and/or taxane-containing chemotherapy. After central confirmation of TNBC status by immunohistochemistry, patients were randomly assigned to either capecitabine or observation. Stratification factors included institution, prior taxane-based therapy, involved axillary lymph nodes, and centrally determined phenotype (basal v nonbasal, according to cytokeratins 5/6 and/or epidermal growth factor receptor positivity by immunohistochemistry). The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival (DFS) between both arms.

RESULTS

Eight hundred seventy-six patients were randomly assigned to capecitabine (n = 448) or observation (n = 428). Median age was 49 years, 55.9% were lymph node negative, 73.9% had a basal phenotype, and 67.5% received previous anthracyclines plus taxanes. Median length of follow-up was 7.3 years. DFS was not significantly prolonged with capecitabine versus observation [hazard ratio (HR), 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06; P = .136]. In a preplanned subgroup analysis, nonbasal patients seemed to derive benefit from the addition of capecitabine with a DFS HR of 0.53 versus 0.94 in those with basal phenotype (interaction test P = .0694) and an HR for overall survival of 0.42 versus 1.23 in basal phenotype (interaction test P = .0052). Tolerance of capecitabine was as expected, with 75.2% of patients completing the planned 8 cycles.

CONCLUSION

This study failed to show a statistically significant increase in DFS by adding extended capecitabine to standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC. In a preplanned subset analysis, patients with nonbasal phenotype seemed to obtain benefit with capecitabine, although this will require additional validation.

Addition of Capecitabine in Breast Cancer First-line Chemotherapy Improves Survival of Breast Cancer Patients

Objective: Capecitabine is an antimetabolic fluoropyrimidine deoxynucleoside carbamate drug that can be converted to 5-FU in vivo. Currently, the role of capecitabine in the treatment of advanced breast cancer has been recognized. Also, Several meta-analyses have elucidated the role of capecitabine in the treatment of breast cancer, indicating that taxane-based regimen with capecitabine may be an effective, convenient, and well tolerated regimen in patients with early breast cancer. However, the correlation between capecitabine-based combination first-line chemotherapy and breast cancer survival remains unclear. Here, we present a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of capecitabine-based combination with first-line chemotherapy treatment in breast cancer. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, and Medline for relevant studies evaluating pooled estimated hazard ratios of capecitabine in breast cancer patients with the eligible criteria up to June 2018. Fixed and random-effect meta-analyses were conducted based on heterogeneity of included studies. Results: Overall, 10 articles with 12,872 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Capecitabine-based combination first-line chemotherapy compared with non-combination had significant impacts on disease-free survival (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.76-0.93; P = 0.000) and overall survival (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.74-0.94; P = 0.001). Also, according to the 3 articles concerning neoadjuvant chemotherapy which included 2534 participants, we found that the addition of capecitabine significantly improved OS (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.63-0.86; P = 0.011). In the subgroup analysis, TNBC patients got significant benefits with the addition of capecitabine in DFS (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.65-0.92; P = 0.004) and OS (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81; P = 0.000). ER negative patients got significant benefits in OS (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.93; P = 0.012). The association of DFS with the addition of capecitabine in Her- patients (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71-0.99; P = 0.005) was significant, as was OS (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70-0.95; P = 0.009),. Meanwhile, patients receiving capecitabine-based combination first-line chemotherapy underwent less adverse effects especially the grade 3/4 leucopenia than patients with non-combination therapy (RR=0.72 95% CI: 0.59-0.86; P = 0.000). Conclusion: Capecitabine combined with first-line chemotherapy in the treatment of breast cancer is an effective and safe treatment option and is worthy of clinical application to improve survival of breast cancer patients. In the future, we can continue to carry out relevant researches to explore the upmost appropriate dose of capecitabine for breast cancer.

Selection of Optimal Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Targeted Therapy for Early Breast Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update

Purpose To update key recommendations of the ASCO guideline adaptation of the Cancer Care Ontario guideline on the selection of optimal adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer and adjuvant targeted therapy for breast cancer. Methods An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews guided by a signals approach to identify new, potentially practice-changing data that might translate to revised practice recommendations. Results The Expert Panel reviewed phase III trials that evaluated adjuvant capecitabine after completion of standard preoperative anthracycline- and taxane-based combination chemotherapy by patients with early-stage breast cancer HER2-negative breast cancer with residual invasive disease at surgery; the addition of 1 year of adjuvant pertuzumab to combination chemotherapy and trastuzumab for patients with early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer; and the use of neratinib as extended adjuvant therapy for patients after combination chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy with early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. Recommendations Patients with early-stage HER2-negative breast cancer with pathologic, invasive residual disease at surgery following standard anthracycline- and taxane-based preoperative therapy may be offered up to six to eight cycles of adjuvant capecitabine. Clinicians may add 1 year of adjuvant pertuzumab to trastuzumab-based combination chemotherapy in patients with high-risk, early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. Clinicians may use extended adjuvant therapy with neratinib to follow trastuzumab in patients with early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. Neratinib causes substantial diarrhea, and diarrhea prophylaxis must be used. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Five-year results of a phase II trial of preoperative 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel with capecitabine (wTX) (with trastuzumab in HER2-positive patients) for patients with stage II or III breast cancer

We aimed to increase pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with invasive breast cancer by adding preoperative capecitabine to docetaxel following 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide (FEC) (with trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive disease) and to evaluate 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) associated with this preoperative regimen. Chemotherapy included four cycles of FEC100 (5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 , epirubicin 100 mg/m2 , cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 IV on Day 1 every 21 days) followed by 4 21-day cycles of docetaxel (35 mg/m2  days 1 and 8) concurrently with capecitabine (825 mg/m2 orally twice daily for 14 days followed by 7 days off) (wTX). For HER2-positive patients, treatment was modified by decreasing epirubicin to 75 mg/m2 and adding trastuzumab (H) in standard doses (FEC75-H →wTX-H). The study objective was to achieve a pCR rate in the breast and axillary lymph nodes of 37% in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer and of 67% in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer treated with preoperative trastuzumab. A total of 186 patients were enrolled on study. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the pCR rate was 31% (37/118, 95% CI: 24-40%) in the HER2-negative patients, 24% (15/62, 95% CI: 14-37%) in ER-positive/HER2-negative patients, 39% (22/56, 95% CI: 27-53%) in the ER-negative/HER2-negative patients, and 46% (29/63, 95% CI: 34-48%) in the HER2-positive patients. The pCR rate in the 40 trastuzumab-treated patients was 53% (21/40, 95% CI: 38-67%). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events included neutropenia, leukopenia, diarrhea, and hand-foot skin reactions. One trastuzumab-treated patient developed grade 3 cardiotoxicity, and 4 others experienced grade 1-2 decrements in left ventricular function; all five patients' cardiac function returned to their baseline upon completion of trastuzumab. At 5 years, disease-free survival was 70% in the HER2-negative population (78% in ER-positive/HER2-negative and 62% in the ER-negative/HER2-negative patients) and 80% in the HER2-positive patients (87% in the trastuzumab-treated HER2-positive patients). At 5 years, overall survival was 80% in the HER2-negative population (88% in ER-positive/HER2-negative and 71% in the ER-negative/HER2-negative patients) and 86% in the HER2-positive patients (94.5% in the trastuzumab-treated HER2-positive patients). FEC100 (FEC75 with trastuzumab) followed by weekly docetaxel plus capecitabine, with or without trastuzumab is a safe, effective preoperative cytotoxic regimen. However, the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel following FEC, with or without trastuzumab, did not increase pCR rates nor 5-year DFS over the rates that have been reported with standard preoperative doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel, with or without trastuzumab. Therefore, the use of capecitabine as part of preoperative chemotherapy is not recommended.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Considerations in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

The optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) regimen in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has not been clearly defined. Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) provides important prognostic information, and, especially in TNBC, is considered a surrogate endpoint for event-free survival. Thus, many neoadjuvant studies in TNBC focus on this as a primary endpoint, and such information may be used for accelerated US Food and Drug Administration approval. Current controversies in the field include: (1) the role of platinum-based compounds; (2) the optimal chemotherapy backbone; and (3) the benefits of additional therapy after surgery. Conflicting results of 2 major studies adding carboplatin to NACT have highlighted the need to balance potential benefits to disease outcomes against increased toxicity. While the PROGECT study suggests efficacy of a nonanthracycline-containing regimen, this is observational data, and evidence in the form of a clinical trial remains to be seen. Data surrounding optimal taxane use support the use of nab-paclitaxel in place of paclitaxel in limited clinical situations. Although bevacizumab may increase pCR rates, this has not translated into survival benefit. Capecitabine shows promise in patients who have not achieved pCR after NACT. The neoadjuvant setting remains an important model for drug development. This review will focus on the most important and most current neoadjuvant trials in women with TNBC.

Evaluating the benefits and adverse effects of an enthracycline-taxane-capecitabine combined regimen in patients with early breast cancer

Capecitabine in addition to anthracycline-taxane based regimens for patients with early breast cancer (EBC) has been reported in previous clinical trials, but the reported efficacy of this regimen remained inconsistent. In order to clarify the survival benefit of this regimen, a meta-analysis was performed. The systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane library and Google scholar. The hazard ratios (HRs) were used to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events. The result indicated that capecitabine combine with an anthracycline-taxane based regimen would significantly improve DFS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.97) and OS (HR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with the controls. In subgroup analysis, we found that capecitabine improved the DFS in hormone receptor negative (HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.92) and triple negative (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.86) EBC patients. However, adding capecitabine might also increase the occurrence of some side-effects, such as hand-foot syndrome, stomatitis and diarrhea. Capecitabine combined with an anthracycline-taxane based regimen maybe effective and well-tolerated by patients with EBC, especially for triple negative breast cancer, and might be a good clinical choice.

Adjuvant Capecitabine in Combination With Docetaxel, Epirubicin, and Cyclophosphamide for Early Breast Cancer: The Randomized Clinical FinXX Trial

Importance

Capecitabine is not considered a standard agent in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. The results of this study suggest that addition of adjuvant capecitabine to a regimen that contains docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide improves survival outcomes of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

Objective

To investigate the effect of capecitabine on long-term survival outcomes of patients with early breast cancer, particularly in subgroups defined by cancer estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) content, and HER2 content (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This is an exploratory analysis of the multicenter FinXX randomized clinical trial that accrued 1500 women in Finland and Sweden between January 27, 2004, and May 29, 2007. About half received 3 cycles of docetaxel followed by 3 cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (T+CEF), while the other half received 3 cycles of docetaxel plus capecitabine followed by 3 cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and capecitabine (TX+CEX). Data analysis took place between January 27, 2004, and December 31, 2015.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Recurrence-free survival (RFS).

Results

Following random allocation, 747 women received T+CEF, and 753 women received TX+CEX. Five patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat population (3 had overt distant metastases at the time of randomization; 2 withdrew consent). The median age of the remaining 1495 patients was 53 years at the time of study entry; 157 (11%) had axillary node-negative disease; 1142 (76%) had ER-positive cancer; and 282 (19%) had HER2-positive cancer. The median follow-up time after random allocation was 10.3 years. There was no significant difference in RFS or overall survival between the groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.71-1.08; P = .23; and HR, 0.84, 95% CI, 0.66-1.07; P = .15; respectively). Breast cancer-specific survival tended to favor the capecitabine group (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60-1.04; P = .10). When RFS and survival of the patients were compared within the subgroups defined by cancer steroid hormone receptor status (ER and/or PR positive vs ER and PR negative) and HER2 status (positive vs negative), TX+CEX was more effective than T+CEF in the subset of patients with TNBC (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31-0.92; P = .02; and HR, 0.55, 95% CI, 0.31-0.96; P = .03; respectively).

Conclusions and Relevance

Capecitabine administration with docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide did not prolong RFS or survival compared with a regimen that contained only standard agents. Patients with TNBC had favorable survival outcomes when treated with the capecitabine-containing regimen in an exploratory subgroup analysis.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00114816.

BRCA1-like profile is not significantly associated with survival benefit of non-myeloablative intensified chemotherapy in the GAIN randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The BRCA1-like profile identifies tumors with a defect in homologous recombination due to inactivation of BRCA1. This profile has been shown to predict which stage III breast cancer patients benefit from myeloablative, DNA double-strand-break-inducing chemotherapy. We tested the predictive potential of the BRCA1-like profile for adjuvant non-myeloablative, intensified dose-dense chemotherapy in the GAIN trial.

METHODS

Lymph node positive breast cancer patients were randomized to 3 × 3 dose-dense cycles of intensified epirubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide (ETC) or 4 cycles concurrent epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by 10 cycles of weekly paclitaxel combined with 4 cycles capecitabine (EC-TX). Only triple negative breast cancer patients (TNBC) for whom tissue was available were included in these planned analyses. BRCA1-like or non-BRCA1-like copy number profiles were derived from low coverage sequencing data.

RESULTS

119 out of 163 TNBC patients (73%) had a BRCA1-like profile. After median follow-up of 83 months, disease free survival (DFS) was not significantly different between BRCA1-like and non-BRCA1-like patients [adjusted hazard ratio (adj.HR) 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.86], neither was overall survival (OS; adj.HR 1.26; 95% CI 0.58-2.71). When split by BRCA1-like status, DFS and OS were not significantly different between treatments. However, EC-TX seemed to result in a trend to an improvement in DFS in patients with a BRCA1-like tumor, while the reverse accounted for ETC treatment in patients with a non-BRCA1-like tumor (p for interaction = 0.094).

CONCLUSIONS

The BRCA1-like profile is not associated with survival benefit for a non-myeloablative, intensified regimen in this study population. Considering the limited cohort size, capecitabine might have additional benefit for TNBC patients.

CREATE-X a role for capecitabine in early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of available data

Breast cancer patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery may benefit from additional anti-cancer therapies. Capecitabine, an oral antimetabolite and prodrug of 5-Flurouracil, has been approved for treating metastatic breast cancer. One randomized clinical trial (CREATE-X) of capecitabine versus no additional therapy has been conducted in women with early stage breast cancer who received standard chemotherapy pre-operative therapy and had residual invasive breast cancer at the time of surgery. Results from CREATE-X, showed that capecitabine had a statistically significant survival advantage compared with no additional therapy. This perspective provides a review and analysis of the available data from CREATEx in the context of results from other adjuvant trials of capecitabine in early stage breast cancer that had disease-free survival as a primary endpoint. We conclude that although the previously published studies of capecitabine in the adjuvant setting did not meet their primary endpoint, the data from these studies are consistent with the hypothesis that capecitabine may offer additional survival benefit in patients with chemo-refractory breast cancer at the time of surgery after receiving standard chemotherapy. In these patients, offering a course of adjuvant capecitabine or enrolling the patient in a clinical trial are appropriate therapeutic options. The patient should be informed about both the increased survival observed in the CREATEx trial and the expected toxicities from capecitabine chemotherapy.

Adjuvant Capecitabine for Breast Cancer after Preoperative Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Patients who have residual invasive carcinoma after the receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer have poor prognoses. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these patients remains unclear.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 910 patients with HER2-negative residual invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (containing anthracycline, taxane, or both) to receive standard postsurgical treatment either with capecitabine or without (control). The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival.

RESULTS

The result of the prespecified interim analysis met the primary end point, so this trial was terminated early. The final analysis showed that disease-free survival was longer in the capecitabine group than in the control group (74.1% vs. 67.6% of the patients were alive and free from recurrence or second cancer at 5 years; hazard ratio for recurrence, second cancer, or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.92; P=0.01). Overall survival was longer in the capecitabine group than in the control group (89.2% vs. 83.6% of the patients were alive at 5 years; hazard ratio for death, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.90; P=0.01). Among patients with triple-negative disease, the rate of disease-free survival was 69.8% in the capecitabine group versus 56.1% in the control group (hazard ratio for recurrence, second cancer, or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87), and the overall survival rate was 78.8% versus 70.3% (hazard ratio for death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.90). The hand-foot syndrome, the most common adverse reaction to capecitabine, occurred in 73.4% of the patients in the capecitabine group.

CONCLUSIONS

After standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy containing anthracycline, taxane, or both, the addition of adjuvant capecitabine therapy was safe and effective in prolonging disease-free survival and overall survival among patients with HER2-negative breast cancer who had residual invasive disease on pathological testing. (Funded by the Advanced Clinical Research Organization and the Japan Breast Cancer Research Group; CREATE-X UMIN Clinical Trials Registry number, UMIN000000843 .).

Capecitabine in early breast cancer: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

Capecitabine is an effective therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Its role in early breast cancer is uncertain due to conflicting data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

PubMed and major conference proceedings were searched to identify RCTs comparing standard chemotherapy with or without capecitabine in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting. Hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), as well as odds ratios (ORs) for toxicities were extracted or calculated and pooled in a meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis compared triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) to non-TNBC and whether capecitabine was given in addition to or in place of standard chemotherapy. Meta-regression was used to explore the influence of TNBC on OS.

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising 9302 patients were included. In unselected patients, capecitabine did not influence DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.99, p = 0.93) or OS (HR 0.90, p = 0.36). There was a significant difference in DFS when capecitabine was given in addition to standard treatment compared with in place of standard treatment (HR 0.92 versus 1.62, interaction p = 0.002). Addition of capecitabine to standard chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved DFS in TNBC versus non-TNBC (HR 0.72 versus 1.01, interaction p = 0.02). Meta-regression showed that adding capecitabine to standard chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in studies with higher proportions of patients with TNBC (R = -0.967, p = 0.007). Capecitabine increased grade 3/4 diarrhoea (odds ratio [OR] 2.33, p < 0.001) and hand-foot syndrome (OR 8.08, p < 0.001), and resulted in more frequent treatment discontinuation (OR 3.80, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adding capecitabine to standard chemotherapy appears to improve DFS and OS in TNBC, but increases adverse events in keeping with its known toxicity profile.

Clinical Value of Capecitabine-Based Combination Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Early Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Capecitabine has consistently demonstrated high efficacy and acceptable tolerability in salvage chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. However, there remains no consensus on its role in adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer (EBC). To estimate the value of capecitabine-based combination adjuvant treatment in EBC, eight randomized controlled trials with 14,072 participants were analyzed. The efficacy and safety outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), relapse, breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and grades 3-5 adverse events. Capecitabine-based combination adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a 16% increase in BCSS (HR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.71-0.98, p = 0.03) in the overall analysis and a 22% improvement in DFS (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.64-0.96, p = 0.02) in the hormone receptor-negative (HR-) subgroup. However, there were no significant differences in DFS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.89-1.05, p = 0.38), OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.82-1.00, p = 0.06), or relapse between capecitabine-based and capecitabine-free combination adjuvant chemotherapy. Analogous results were observed in the subgroup analyses of HR+, HER2-, HER2+, and triple-negative EBC. Regarding safety, reduced myelosuppression and hand-foot syndrome development were observed in capecitabine-treated patients. Capecitabine-based combination adjuvant chemotherapy might provide some BCSS benefit compared with capecitabine-free regimens in EBC, but the absolute survival gain is small, and the survival benefit appears to be restricted to patients with HR- EBC, which may indicate a target population for capecitabine-based combination adjuvant chemotherapy.

The molecular landscape of high-risk early breast cancer: comprehensive biomarker analysis of a phase III adjuvant population

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease and patients are managed clinically based on ER, PR, HER2 expression, and key risk factors. We sought to characterize the molecular landscape of high-risk breast cancer patients enrolled onto an adjuvant chemotherapy study to understand how disease subsets and tumor immune status impact survival. DNA and RNA were extracted from 861 breast cancer samples from patients enrolled onto the United States Oncology trial 01062. Samples were characterized using multiplex gene expression, copy number, and qPCR mutation assays. HR⁺ patients with a PIK3CA mutant tumor had a favorable disease-free survival (DFS; HR 0.66, P=0.05), however, the prognostic effect was specific to luminal A patients (Luminal A: HR 0.67, P=0.1; Luminal B: HR 1.01, P=0.98). Molecular subtyping of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) suggested that the mesenchymal subtype had the worst DFS, whereas the immunomodulatory subtype had the best DFS. Profiling of immunologic genes revealed that TNBC tumors (n=280) displaying an activated T-cell signature had a longer DFS following adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.59, P=0.04), while a distinct set of immune genes was associated with DFS in HR⁺ cancers. Utilizing a discovery approach, we identified genes associated with a high risk of recurrence in HR⁺ patients, which were validated in an independent data set. Molecular classification based on PAM50 and TNBC subtyping stratified clinical high-risk patients into distinct prognostic subsets. Patients with high expression of immune-related genes showed superior DFS in both HR⁺ and TNBC. These results may inform patient management and drug development in early breast cancer.

Highlights of the 2015 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium

This manuscript provides a comprehensive review and highlights of the 2015 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium by the leading breast cancer specialists and investigators in the field.

Capecitabine in Combination with Standard (Neo)Adjuvant Regimens in Early Breast Cancer: Survival Outcome from a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Capecitabine has been investigated in early breast cancer in several studies, but it was undefined that whether it could improve survival. To investigate whether the addition of capecitabine affected survival in patients with early breast cancer, a meta-analysis was conducted and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and toxicity were assessed. The PubMed, Embase databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies between January 2006 and April 2016. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or data for calculating HRs with 95% CI were derived. Seven trials with 9097 patients, consisted of 4 adjuvant and 3 neoadjuvant studies, were included in this meta-analysis. Adding capecitabine showed no improvement in DFS (HR = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85-1.02; P = 0.12), whereas a significant improvement in OS was observed (HR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = 0.008). A sub-analysis of DFS showed that benefit of capecitabine derived from patients with triple negative subtype and with extensive axillary involvement. Safety profiles were consistent with the known side-effects of capecitabine, but more patients discontinued scheduled treatment in the capecitabine group. Combining capecitabine with standard (neo)adjuvant regimens in early breast cancer demonstrated a significantly superior OS, and indicated DFS improvement in some subtypes with high risk of recurrence. Selection of subtypes was a key to identify patients who might gain survival benefit from capecitabine.