Hong Woo Sung, Jeon Ja Young, Kang Seok Yun, Jung Yong Sik, Kim Ji Young, Ahn Mi Sun, Kang Doo Kyoung, Kim Tae Hee, Yim Hyun Ee, An Young-Sil, Park Rae Woong, Kim Ku Sang
Department of Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
J Korean Surg Soc. 2013 Jul;85(1):7-14. doi: 10.4174/jkss.2013.85.1.7. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced breast cancer and is increasingly considered for patients with operable disease. Recently, as many clinical trials have demonstrated favorable outcomes of anthracycline-taxane based regimen, this approach has been widely used in the neoadjuvant setting.
We compared women who received adriamycine and docetaxel (AD) with adriamycin, cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel (AC-T) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The AD group was scheduled for six cycles of AD (50 mg/m(2) and 75 mg/m(2), respectively) at a 3-week interval. The AC-T group was scheduled for four cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (50 mg/m(2) and 500 mg/m(2), respectively) followed by four cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) at a 3-week interval.
The responses of chemotherapy were equivalent (overall response rate [AD, 75.7% vs. AC-T, 80.9%; P = 0.566], pathologic complete response [pCR] rate [breast and axilla: AD, 10.8% vs. AC-T, 12.8%; P = 1.000; breast only: AD, 18.9% vs. AC-T, 14.9%, P = 0.623], breast conserving surgery rate [P = 0.487], and breast conserving surgery conversion rate [P = 0.562]). The pCR rate in the breast was higher in the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive cases (HER2 positive 33.3% vs. negative 10%, P = 0.002). Although nonhematologic toxicities were comparable, hematologic toxicities were more severe in the AD group. Most women in the AD group suffered from grade 3/4 neutropenia (P < 0.001) and neutropenic fever (P < 0.001).
Tumor responses were not different in various variables between the two groups. However, AC-T was a more tolerable regimen than AD in patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
新辅助化疗是局部晚期乳腺癌患者的标准治疗方法,对于可手术治疗的患者也越来越多地被考虑应用。最近,由于许多临床试验已证明基于蒽环类-紫杉类方案有良好疗效,这种方法已在新辅助治疗中广泛应用。
我们比较了接受阿霉素和多西他赛(AD)与阿霉素、环磷酰胺序贯紫杉醇(AC-T)作为新辅助化疗的女性患者。AD组计划每3周进行6个周期的AD治疗(分别为50mg/m²和75mg/m²)。AC-T组计划先进行4个周期的阿霉素和环磷酰胺治疗(分别为50mg/m²和500mg/m²),然后每3周进行4个周期的紫杉醇治疗(175mg/m²)。
化疗反应相当(总体反应率[AD组为75.7%,AC-T组为80.9%;P = 0.566],病理完全缓解[pCR]率[乳腺和腋窝:AD组为10.8%,AC-T组为12.8%;P = 1.000;仅乳腺:AD组为18.9%,AC-T组为14.9%,P = 0.623],保乳手术率[P = 0.487],以及保乳手术转化率[P = 0.562])。人表皮生长因子受体2(HER2)阳性病例中乳腺的pCR率更高(HER2阳性为33.3%,阴性为10%,P = 0.002)。虽然非血液学毒性相当,但AD组的血液学毒性更严重。AD组大多数女性患有3/4级中性粒细胞减少症(P < 0.001)和中性粒细胞减少性发热(P < 0.001)。
两组在各种变量上的肿瘤反应无差异。然而,在接受新辅助化疗的乳腺癌患者中,AC-T方案比AD方案更易于耐受。