Combination chemotherapy for metastatic or recurrent carcinoma of the breast--a randomized phase III trial comparing CAF versus VATH versus VATH alternating with CMFVP: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 8281.

PURPOSE We sought to compare three doxorubicin-based therapies for metastatic breast cancer for response frequency, time to treatment failure (TTF), and survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS Women with metastatic breast cancer who had measurable disease, required laboratory tests, had received no prior chemotherapy for metastases, had a Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) performance status < or = 2, and provided informed consent were eligible. Treatment included the following: arm I--cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF); arm II--vinblastine, doxorubicin, thiotepa, and halotestin (VATH); and arm III--VATH alternating with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil, vincristine, and prednisone (CMFVP) on cycles 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. Doses were modified for toxicities. Standard CALGB response and toxicity criteria were used. RESULTS Between August 1982 and February 1987, 497 women were entered and 491 were treated on study. Pretreatment characteristics were well balanced and the median follow-up duration was 79 months. There were no significant differences in response (complete [CR] plus partial [PR]) at 50% on arm I, 57% on arm II, and 51% on arm III. The median TTFs were 8, 8, and 9 months, respectively, in favor of arm III when compared with arm I (P = .028). The median survival times for treatment arms I, II, and III were 15, 17, and 17 months, respectively. After multivariate regression analyses, only estrogen receptors (ER), performance status, and number of metastatic sites influenced TTF and survival. Leukopenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 toxicity, occurring in 90%, 80%, and 92% of patients per arm, respectively. Lethal toxicities were seen in four, five, and six women, respectively. Overall, there were more grade > or = 3 toxicities on arm II than I, and most occurred on arm III (P = .02). CONCLUSION The VATH regimen appears similarly effective to the CAF regimen as initial therapy. Alternating CMFVP with VATH did not improve response rate or survival. After accounting for other variables, treatment arm was not related to outcome. New therapeutic regimens are still needed.

[1]  J. Mcvie Chemotherapy for advanced disease. How to raise enthusiasm. , 1996, Chest.

[2]  A. Korzun,et al.  Chemotherapy versus chemoimmunotherapy (CAF v CAFVP v CMF each +/- MER) for metastatic carcinoma of the breast: a CALGB study. Cancer and Leukemia Group B. , 1987, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  P. Raich,et al.  Chemohormonal therapy in advanced carcinoma of the breast: Cancer and Leukemia Group B protocol 8081. , 1987, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  M. Cunningham,et al.  Treatment of breast carcinoma recurrent after adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy , 1984, Journal of surgical oncology.

[5]  R. Silver,et al.  A comparison of intermittent vs. continuous and of adriamycin vs. methotrexate 5‐drug chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer A Cancer and Leukemia Group B study , 1984, American journal of clinical oncology.

[6]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in metastatic breast cancer. , 1983, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  K. Resser,et al.  5‐Fluorouracil + oncovin + adriamycin + mitomycin c (FOAM): Ań Effective Program for Breast Cancer, Even for Disease Refractory to Previous Chemotherapy A Northern California Oncology Group (NCOG) Study , 1983, Cancer.

[8]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Response to secondary therapy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the breast previously treated with adjuvant chemotherapy , 1983, Cancer.

[9]  R. Gelman,et al.  Prospective evaluation of rotating chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial. , 1983, American journal of clinical oncology.

[10]  Taylor Sg,et al.  Experience of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group with doxorubicin as a single agent in patients with previously untreated breast cancer. , 1982 .

[11]  J. Holland,et al.  One‐day vath (vinblastine, adriamycin, thiotepa, and halotestin) therapy for advanced breast cancer refractory to chemotherapy , 1981, Cancer.

[12]  D. V. Van Echo,et al.  Mitomycin C and vinblastine chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer , 1981, Cancer.

[13]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Prognostic factors in metastatic breast cancer treated with combination chemotherapy. , 1979, Cancer research.

[14]  J. Holland,et al.  Vinblastine, adriamycin, thiotepa, and halotestin (VATH). Therapy for advanced breast cancer refractory to prior chemotherapy , 1978, Cancer.

[15]  C. Vogel,et al.  Phase II study of mitomycin C and vinblastine in women with advanced breast cancer refractory to standard cytotoxic therapy. , 1978, Cancer treatment reports.

[16]  C. Spurr,et al.  Adriamycin versus methotrexate in five‐drug combination chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. A randomized trial , 1978, Cancer.

[17]  J. Bull,et al.  A randomized comparative trial of adriamycin versus methotrexate in combination drug therapy , 1978, Cancer.

[18]  C. Spurr,et al.  Combination chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer.: a randomized trial comparing a three-vs a five-drug program. , 1977, Archives of internal medicine.

[19]  F. V. von Eyben,et al.  Phase II study of combined vincristine, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, and methotrexate with citrovorum factor factor rescue in metastatic breast cancer. , 1977, Cancer treatment reports.

[20]  R. Sponzo,et al.  Hexamethylmelamine, vincristine, and methotrexate chemotherapy in advanced neoplasms. , 1977, Cancer treatment reports.

[21]  S Krauss,et al.  A comparison of cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, 5‐fluorouracil (CAF) and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5‐fluorouracil, vincristine, prednisone (CMFVP) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. A southeastern cancer study group project , 1977, Cancer.

[22]  M. Pike,et al.  Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples. , 1977, British Journal of Cancer.

[23]  G. Bonadonna,et al.  Response and survival in advanced breast cancer after two non-cross-resistant combinations. , 1976, British medical journal.

[24]  V. Barnett,et al.  Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1975 .

[25]  Greenspan Em Combination chemotherapy for advanced mammary carcinoma: a twelve-year experience. , 1972 .

[26]  S. Cutler,et al.  Classification of patients with disseminated cancer of the breast , 1969, Cancer.

[27]  E. Kaplan,et al.  Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations , 1958 .

[28]  J H Goldie,et al.  Rationale for the use of alternating non-cross-resistant chemotherapy. , 1982, Cancer treatment reports.

[29]  Brunner Kw,et al.  Prognostic factors in metastatic breast cancer. , 1981 .

[30]  D. Ettinger,et al.  Doxorubicin, vincristine, and cis-diamminedichloroplatinum (II) therapy in patients with advanced breast cancer. , 1981, Medical and pediatric oncology.

[31]  D. Cox Regression Models and Life-Tables , 1972 .