Clinical efficacy of including capecitabine in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

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.

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.

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.

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.

Evaluation of the EGFR polymorphism R497K in two cohorts of neoadjuvantly treated breast cancer patients

Pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) presents great variability, and new prognostic biomarkers are needed. Our aim was to evaluate the association of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) polymorphism R497K (rs2227983) with prognostic features and clinical outcomes of breast cancer, including the pathological response to NAC and the recurrence-free survival (RFS). Tumoral complete response (tCR) was defined by no remaining invasive cancer in the excised breast, whereas pathological complete response (pCR) was defined by no remaining invasive cancer both in the excised breast and lymph nodes. Two independent cohorts were analyzed: one from Brazil (INCA, n = 288) and one from The Netherlands (NKI-AVL, n = 255). In the INCA cohort, the variant (Lys-containing) genotypes were significantly associated with lower proportion of tCR (ORadj = 0.92; 95%CI = 0.85-0.99), whereas in the NKI-AVL cohort they were associated with tumor grade 3 (p = 0.035) and with triple-negative subtype (p = 0.032), but not with clinical outcomes. Such distinct prognostic associations may have arisen due to different neoadjuvant protocols (p < 0.001), or to lower age at diagnosis (p < 0.001) and higher proportion of tumor grade 3 (p = 0.018) at the NKI-AVL cohort. Moreover, NKI-AVL patients achieved better proportion of pCR (21.2% vs 8.3%, p < 0.001) and better RFS (HRadj = 0.48; 95% adjCI = 0.26-0.86) than patients from INCA. In conclusion, large scale studies comprehending different populations are needed to evaluate the impact of genome variants on breast cancer outcomes.

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.

Evaluation of the clinical benefits of adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy in elderly women with breast cancer: A retrospective study

Capecitabine is orally administered and may be safely and conveniently used in patients with cancer. The antitumor activity of capecitabine in breast cancer was mostly demonstrated in the salvage therapy setting, whereas the effect of adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy in breast cancer remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to evaluate adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy in elderly women with breast cancer. A total of 251 patients were enrolled and survival was compared between elderly breast cancer patients who received adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy and those who received no chemotherapy. Cancer-specific and disease-free survival curves were compared using log-rank tests and survival curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analyses were conducted using Cox's proportional hazard regression model. There was no significant difference between the clinicopathological characteristics, including age, tumor size, lymph node status, histological grade and hormone status, between patients in the two groups. The breast cancer-specific survival rate was 89.3% in the capecitabine monotherapy group vs. 81.3% in the no chemotherapy group; the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.128). The disease-free survival rate was 81.7% in the capecitabine monotherapy group vs. 65.3% in the no chemotherapy group. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a longer disease-free survival in the capecitabine monotherapy group (P=0.015). On Cox regression analysis, capecitabine monotherapy was found to be associated with the disease-free survival rate (P=0.014, hazard ratio=0.500) but not with the cancer-specific survival rate (P=0.181). The adverse events of capecitabine monotherapy were recorded and there was no chemotherapy interruption due to severe adverse reactions. Therefore, adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy in elderly women with breast cancer is a safe and effective option, as well as a viable alternative for elderly breast cancer patients who refuse standard adjuvant therapy.

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.

Deregulation of the EGFR/PI3K/PTEN/Akt/mTORC1 pathway in breast cancer: possibilities for therapeutic intervention

The EGFR/PI3K/PTEN/Akt/mTORC1/GSK-3 pathway plays prominent roles in malignant transformation, prevention of apoptosis, drug resistance and metastasis. The expression of this pathway is frequently altered in breast cancer due to mutations at or aberrant expression of: HER2, ERalpha, BRCA1, BRCA2, EGFR1, PIK3CA, PTEN, TP53, RB as well as other oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes. In some breast cancer cases, mutations at certain components of this pathway (e.g., PIK3CA) are associated with a better prognosis than breast cancers lacking these mutations. The expression of this pathway and upstream HER2 has been associated with breast cancer initiating cells (CICs) and in some cases resistance to treatment. The anti-diabetes drug metformin can suppress the growth of breast CICs and herceptin-resistant HER2+ cells. This review will discuss the importance of the EGFR/PI3K/PTEN/Akt/mTORC1/GSK-3 pathway primarily in breast cancer but will also include relevant examples from other cancer types. The targeting of this pathway will be discussed as well as clinical trials with novel small molecule inhibitors. The targeting of the hormone receptor, HER2 and EGFR1 in breast cancer will be reviewed in association with suppression of the EGFR/PI3K/PTEN/Akt/mTORC1/GSK-3 pathway.

Women with large (≥3 cm) and locally advanced breast cancers (T3, 4, N1, 2, M0) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC: cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, docetaxel): addition of capecitabine improves 4-year disease-free survival

Purpose

To determine whether capecitabine (X), combined with docetaxel (T) following doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C), enhanced the pathological complete response (pCR) in the breast and axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) of women with large or locally advanced breast cancers (LLABCs) improving outcome, and the effect on quality of life (QoL).

Patients and methods

117 women were enrolled, 112 randomised to 2 cycles of AC (60 mg/m², 600 mg/m²) given 3 weekly. Tumour responses were assessed by magnetic resonance mammography. Responders (n = 77) received 2 further cycles of AC and were randomised to 4 cycles of T (100 mg/m²) (Group A) or T (75 mg/m²) and X (2000 mg/m²/day), day one to 14 of each 3 weekly cycle (Group B). Non-responders (n = 35) were randomised to 6 cycles of T (Group C) or T + X (Group D). QoL questionnaires were completed at each chemotherapy visit. Pathological responses were evaluated using established criteria.

Results

The groups were comparable in patient and tumour characteristics (79.5% T2, 85.7% ductal, 73.2% ER +ve, 22.3% HER2 +ve, 42% involved ALNs). Overall breast pCR was 27.1%, Groups A + C versus B + D (p = 0.446). ALN +ve pCR was 41.9%, Groups A + C versus B + D (p = 0.231). 4-year disease-free survival (DFS) was significantly improved with X (p = 0.016) but not overall survival (p = 0.056). Triple -ve and HER2 +ve tumours, and persistent ALN disease were risk factors for metastases. X increased severe nail changes (p = 0.0002) and hand-foot syndrome (p = 0.014) without affecting QoL.

Conclusion

NAC-X did not increase breast and ALN pCR but improved 4-year DFS, without detriment to QoL.

Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer

Neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer refers to the use of different treatment modalities prior to surgical excision of the tumor. It has been accepted as a treatment option for patients with nonmetastatic disease, because it renders inoperable tumors operable and increases the rates of breast-conserving surgery, while achieving similar long-term clinical outcomes as adjuvant treatment. The neoadjuvant setting is being increasingly perceived as a research platform, where the biologic effects of traditional anticancer agents can be delineated, prognostic and predictive biomarkers can be identified, and the development of targeted agents can be expedited. Surrogate endpoints that can predict long-term clinical outcome and are evaluable early on, such as the pathologic complete response, offer valuable opportunities for rapid assessment of anticancer agents. Additionally, efforts for molecular profiling of the post-neoadjuvant residual disease hold the potential to lead to personalized therapy for breast cancer patients with early-stage high-risk disease.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different molecular breast cancer subtypes: a retrospective study in Russian population

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the objective clinical response (cOR), pathological complete response (pCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) in 231 Russian patients with four subtypes of breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. About 130 (56.3 %) patients received anthracycline-based, 56 (24.2 %) capecitabine-containing (CAX), 28 (12.1 %) taxotere and 17 (7.4 %) non-anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens at the Tomsk Cancer Research Institute between 2000 and 2010. Tumors were subtyped according to the hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemical data. The majority of tumors (48.9 %) were ER+/PR+ and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-), 10.4 % were ER+ PR+ and HER2-positive (HR+/HER2+), 9.1 % were ER-/PR- and HER2-overexpressed (HER2-enriched) and 31.6 % were ER-/PR- and HER2-negative (triple negative). Both cOR and pCR were significantly higher in the triple-negative tumors compared to the other subtypes (P = 0.021 and P = 0.033, respectively). Among the four chemotherapy regimens, only CAX regimen had a predictive value for cOR (HR 2.30, 95 % CI 1.16-4.58, P = 0.009). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the triple-negative subtype (HR 2.54, 95 % CI 1.06-1.42, P = 0.011) and CAX regimen (HR 3.01, 95 % CI 1.01-1.46, P = 0.002) were significantly associated with cOR. No association between patient's PFS and a tumor subtype was observed. However, there was a trend for a prolonged PFS among patients with cOR (P = 0.056). Our data indicate a potentially better prognosis for triple-negative breast cancer patients if treated with the CAX neoadjuvant regimen.

Synthesis, anti-HIV and cytostatic evaluation of 3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine (FLT) pro-nucleotides

A series of pro-nucleotide phosphoramidates and phosphorodiamidates of the antiviral lead compound 3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine (FLT) have been designed and synthesized. In vitro antiretroviral and cytostatic studies revealed potent (sub-micromolar) inhibition of HIV-1 and HIV-2 replication, with retention of activity in thymidine kinase-negative cell models, as predicted by the ProTide concept.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for gastric carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.