Is it important to adapt neoadjuvant chemotherapy to the visible clinical response? An open randomized phase II study comparing response-guided and standard treatments in HER2-negative operable breast cancer.

Date publication

mars 2015

Auteurs

Membres identifiés du Cancéropôle Est :
Dr EYMARD Jean-Christophe , Dr GARBAR Christian

Tous les auteurs :
Wang-Lopez Q, Mouret-Reynier MA, Savoye AM, Abrial C, Kwiatkowski F, Garbar C, DuBray-Longeras P, Eymard JC, Lebouedec G, Vanpraagh I, Penault-Llorca F, Chollet P, Cure H

Lien Pubmed

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25637380

Résumé

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment provides a unique opportunity to evaluate individual tumor sensitivity. This study evaluated whether a response-guided strategy could improve clinical outcome compared with a standard treatment. METHODS: Overall, 264 previously untreated stage II-III operable breast cancer patients were randomized to receive either standard treatment (arm A, n = 131), consisting of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC100: 500, 100, and 500 mg/m(2), respectively, for 3 cycles) followed by docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) for 3 cycles), or adapted treatment (arm B, n = 133), beginning with 2 cycles of FEC100 and switching to docetaxel if tumor size decreased by

Référence

Oncologist. 2015 Mar;20(3):243-4