Original Article
Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy Compared with High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation for Metastatic Breast Cancer
N Engl J Med 2000; 342:1069-1076April 13, 2000
- Abstract
Background
We conducted a randomized trial in which we compared high-dose chemotherapy plus hematopoietic stem-cell rescue with a prolonged course of monthly conventional-dose chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer.
Methods
Women 18 to 60 years of age who had metastatic breast cancer received four to six cycles of standard combination chemotherapy. Patients who had a complete or partial response to induction chemotherapy were then randomly assigned to receive either a single course of high doses of carboplatin, thiotepa, and cyclophosphamide plus transplantation of autologous hematopoietic stem cells or up to 24 cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in conventional doses. The primary end point was survival.
Results
The median follow-up was 37 months. Of 553 patients who enrolled in the study, 58 had a complete response to induction chemotherapy and 252 had a partial response. Of these, 110 patients were assigned to receive high-dose chemotherapy plus hematopoietic stem cells and 89 were assigned to receive conventional-dose chemotherapy. In an intention-to-treat analysis, we found no significant difference in survival overall at three years between the two treatment groups (32 percent in the transplantation group and 38 percent in the conventional-chemotherapy group). There was no significant difference between the two treatments in the median time to progression of the disease (9.6 months for high-dose chemotherapy plus hematopoietic stem cells and 9.0 months for conventional-dose chemotherapy).
Conclusions
As compared with maintenance chemotherapy in conventional doses, high-dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem-cell transplantation soon after the induction of a complete or partial remission with conventional-dose chemotherapy does not improve survival in women with metastatic breast cancer.
Media in This Article
Figure 3
Kaplan–Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Who Were Randomly Assigned to Treatment with Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy Alone or High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation.Figure 2
Kaplan–Meier Estimates of Overall Survival of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Who Were Randomly Assigned to Treatment with Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy Alone or High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation.Article Activity
- Article
Most women with metastatic breast cancer have a response to various combinations of conventional-dose chemotherapy, but less than 5 percent of them are alive 10 years after the detection of metastatic spread.1 Several phase 2 trials performed in the late 1980s reported promising results for high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in patients with chemotherapy-responsive metastatic breast cancer.2-6 These trials consistently reported high overall rates of response (combined complete and partial responses), ranging from 73 to 100 percent. Despite a median survival of only 10 to 24 months, 7 to 18 percent of patients in these studies remained free of progressive disease for up to 5 years after the treatment. This result was perceived to be an improvement as compared with that in historical controls. The incidence of severe adverse effects, however, was thought to be greater than that reported in historical controls; the transplantation-related mortality ranged from 0 to 22 percent, but improved supportive care and better patient selection promised reduced toxicity in the future.7
By the late 1980s, interest in hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation increased quickly among patients and physicians. Demands on insurers for financial coverage increased, and breast cancer became the most common indication for such transplantations in North America,8 despite the lack of studies comparing stem-cell transplantation with conventional-dose chemotherapy.
The unresolved question about what constituted optimal therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer led the Philadelphia Bone Marrow Transplant Group to design and conduct a study of postremission therapy. Later, to increase the accrual rate, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG), and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) joined the study, which had been designated a high priority by the National Cancer Institute. Patients who had not received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were first given conventional-dose chemotherapy, and patients with an objective response were randomly assigned to receive a prolonged course of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in conventional doses or high-dose chemotherapy with carboplatin, thiotepa, and cyclophosphamide plus autologous stem-cell transplantation. The primary objective of this study was to compare the overall survival, the time to progression, and the toxicity associated with these two treatment regimens.
Methods
Patients
Enrollment began in Philadelphia in December 1990 and ended in December 1997. The NCCTG joined the study in 1990, and ECOG and SWOG joined in 1994. The coordination of the study was transferred to ECOG in 1995, the same year it was designated a high-priority study by the National Cancer Institute. To be eligible, women had to be 18 to 60 years old; to have adequate renal and hepatic function, a normal cardiac ejection fraction, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; to have locally recurrent or distant metastatic breast cancer; and to have received no previous chemotherapy for metastatic disease. If a patient had received adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical treatment of the primary tumor, the adjuvant therapy had to have been concluded more than six months before enrollment in the study. Patients could be premenopausal or postmenopausal, and if they had a positive estrogen-receptor assay, they must have had at least one prior hormonal treatment unless life-threatening visceral disease was present. Patients were excluded if they had metastases to the central nervous system, an uncontrolled infection, or any illness that would preclude the possibility of subsequent stem-cell transplantation. All patients provided written informed consent.
Induction Chemotherapy
For patients who had previously received a total dose of less than 400 mg of doxorubicin per square meter of body-surface area, induction chemotherapy consisted of oral cyclophosphamide (100 mg per square meter per day for 14 days), intravenous doxorubicin (30 mg per square meter on day 1 and day 8), and intravenous fluorouracil (500 mg per square meter on day 1 and day 8) (Figure 1Figure 1
Enrollment of Patients, Induction Chemotherapy, and Randomization to High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation or Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy.). For patients who had previously received a total dose of 400 to 500 mg of doxorubicin per square meter, induction chemotherapy consisted of oral cyclophosphamide (100 mg per square meter per day for 14 days), intravenous methotrexate (40 mg per square meter on day 1 and day 8), and intravenous fluorouracil (600 mg per square meter on day 1 and day 8), with optional treatment with prednisone (40 mg per square meter orally for 14 days), given at the discretion of the treating physician. Four to six cycles of chemotherapy were given at intervals of 28 days.Randomization
After receiving induction chemotherapy, patients were reevaluated. Patients were eligible to undergo randomization if they had had a complete remission (defined as no evidence of disease), a partial remission (defined as a reduction of at least 50 percent in the size of all measurable tumor areas in more than 50 percent of involved organ sites), or a partial remission restricted to bone (defined as bone lesions that remained stable on bone scans and x-ray films for a period of at least eight weeks in association with an improvement in the ECOG performance status, a decrease in the requirement for analgesia, or both). Patients were withdrawn if they had new lesions or progression (defined as an increase of more than 25 percent in the size of measurable lesions). Eligible patients had to have no detectable involvement of bone marrow by the tumor; adequate hematopoietic function; normal renal, cardiac, pulmonary, and hepatic function; and no severe medical or psychiatric problems.
All patients again provided written informed consent at the transplantation center. Randomization had to occur within eight weeks after the last dose of induction chemotherapy. Patients who did not have a complete or partial remission after six cycles of therapy were withdrawn from the study.
High-Dose Chemotherapy and Stem-Cell Transplantation
Hematopoietic stem cells were harvested from the blood before the start of high-dose chemotherapy in all patients who were to undergo autologous stem-cell transplantation. In the initial stage of the protocol, granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor was administered to stimulate the mobilization of stem cells from the bone marrow. A minimum of 2×108 nucleated cells per kilogram of body weight was also harvested from the bone marrow and cryopreserved.9 The bone marrow and blood stem cells were combined and infused after high-dose chemotherapy. Later in this investigation, the protocol was amended to allow stimulation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, with an optional bone marrow harvest. If only stem cells from the blood were used, a minimum of 6×108 nucleated cells per kilogram was harvested.
The preparative regimen for autologous stem-cell transplantation lasted four days and consisted of a continuous infusion of cyclophosphamide (1500 mg per square meter; total dose, 6000 mg per square meter), carboplatin (200 mg per square meter; total dose, 800 mg per square meter), and thiotepa (125 mg per square meter; total dose, 500 mg per square meter).10 Stem cells were infused on day 0, approximately 48 hours after the completion of chemotherapy, and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (250 mg per square meter) was administered to stimulate hematopoietic recovery (i.e., until the absolute neutrophil count exceeded 1000 per cubic millimeter for a period of three days).
Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy
Patients who were randomly assigned to receive maintenance therapy received cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in the same doses as those used for induction chemotherapy and according to the same schedule. Treatment continued until treatment-limiting toxic effects or disease progression occurred or until 24 cycles had been administered (Figure 1).
Statistical Analysis
The study was originally designed to have a power of 90 percent to detect a doubling of the median survival with high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell transplantation within the complete-response subgroup and the partial-response subgroup. The original design required the randomization of 99 eligible patients with a complete response and 247 eligible patients with a partial response. In the fall of 1996, the design was modified due to low enrollment. In the revised design, there were no longer separate accrual goals or analyses planned on the basis of response status. Instead, the analysis was to be stratified according to the response to induction chemotherapy (complete response or partial response). The revised design required the randomization of 164 eligible patients. For design purposes, we assumed the following: one third of the randomized patients who had a response to induction chemotherapy would have a complete response, and two thirds of the randomized patients would have a partial response; for the patients who were randomly assigned to receive conventional-dose chemotherapy, median survival would be 2.5 years for those with a complete response and 1 year for those with a partial response; 10 percent of all patients would be found to be ineligible after randomization; and 10 percent of each group would be noncompliant with treatment. Two interim analyses were planned — the first after 66 randomized patients had died and the second after 96 patients had died — and a final analysis was scheduled after 120 patients had died. The stopping boundaries used at each interim analysis for decision making were calculated from the O'Brien–Fleming use function.11 This design gave the study a power of 85 percent to detect a doubling of the median survival with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05, with use of a stratified log-rank test.
The primary analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat basis and included eligible randomized patients. Randomization was stratified according to five factors: the type of response to induction chemotherapy (complete or partial), the predominant site of distant metastasis (visceral or other), age (≤42 years or >42 years), estrogen-receptor status (positive or negative), and cooperative group. Overall survival was measured from the time of randomization until death from any cause. Progression was measured from the time of randomization until progression of the disease. Data on one patient who died without progression were censored when she was last known to be in remission.
The first interim analysis was conducted in November 1997 after 65 deaths had occurred, and the second was conducted in November 1998 after 93 deaths had occurred. At the time of the second interim analysis, the data-monitoring committee recommended that the study be unblinded because the likelihood that the study would show a significant difference in favor of stem-cell transplantation at the final analysis was very low (a conditional-power calculation showed that the likelihood was less than 1 percent). The unadjusted 95 percent confidence interval of the hazard ratio for the likelihood of survival with conventional-dose chemotherapy as compared with high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell transplantation was 0.52 to 1.22. On the basis of the method of Jennison and Turnbull,12 the 95 percent repeated confidence interval for the hazard ratio with use of the O'Brien–Fleming use function was 0.48 to 1.32. Given the actual rate of noncompliance, a true hazard ratio of 2.0, the target alternative hypothesis, equates with an observed hazard ratio of approximately 1.72. Since 1.72 is outside the repeated confidence interval, the data at the second interim analysis were inconsistent with the alternative hypothesis.
At the time of the final analysis, after 114 deaths had occurred, the 95 percent repeated confidence interval for the hazard ratio for the likelihood of survival after conventional-dose chemotherapy, as compared with high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell transplantation, was 0.53 to 1.17. Given the actual rate of noncompliance, a true hazard ratio of 1.25, for example, would equate with an observed hazard ratio of 1.19. Since 1.19 is outside the repeated confidence interval, even a 25 percent improvement in survival as a result of transplantation is inconsistent with our data.
Results
Enrollment of Patients
A total of 553 patients were enrolled for induction chemotherapy. The accrual rate was 70 patients per year before June 1994, and it subsequently increased to 88 patients per year after ECOG and SWOG joined the study. Of the 553 patients, 58 had a complete response and 252 had a partial response. Of these, 110 were randomly assigned to receive high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation and 89 were assigned to receive conventional-dose chemotherapy. The skewed assignment resulted from an attempt to balance the randomization for numerous stratification factors.
The remaining 354 patients did not undergo randomization. A total of 208 patients had less than a partial response to induction chemotherapy: 105 had stable disease, 74 had disease progression, and in 29 the disease or its status could not be evaluated. Thirty-two patients were found to have been ineligible for induction therapy: in 11 the laboratory evaluation before enrollment was inadequate, 6 were estrogen-receptor–positive and had received no prior hormonal therapy or had no visceral disease, the disease could not be evaluated in 4, 3 had received prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, 2 had central nervous system involvement, 2 had an ECOG performance status of more than 1, 1 had undergone oophorectomy less than four weeks before entry into the study, 1 had received prior radiotherapy to the pelvis and lower spine, 1 had inadequate data, and 1 had no metastatic disease. Among the remaining 114 patients with a complete or partial response after induction chemotherapy, 48 declined to undergo randomization or withdrew from the study, 21 had breast-cancer cells in the bone marrow, 4 were not eligible for other reasons, 3 died or had disease progression in the interim before randomization, and 38 did not undergo randomization for unknown or other reasons. The group of eligible patients who did not undergo randomization was not significantly different from those who did undergo randomization (data not shown).
Characteristics of Patients
Of the 199 randomized patients, 15 were found to be ineligible and were not included in the primary analysis: 9 did not have a documented response to induction chemotherapy, 3 were estrogen-receptor–positive and had received no prior hormonal therapy or had no visceral disease, 2 had disease progression in the interval before randomization, and 1 had no data other than documentation of a response. Nine of the 15 ineligible patients were assigned to receive high-dose chemotherapy and to undergo stem-cell transplantation, and 6 to receive conventional-dose chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. Nine additional randomized patients were ineligible according to eligibility criteria specified in the protocol but were included in the primary analysis. In the case of these patients the reasons for ineligibility were minor: inadequate laboratory evaluation before registration in four; bone marrow cellularity of less than 30 percent but adequate stem-cell collection in two; receipt of a course of appropriate induction chemotherapy before registration, a practice that was allowed early in the course of the study, in one; prior radiotherapy to the pelvis or lower spine but subsequent adequate stem-cell collection in one; and prior chemotherapy for locally recurrent disease in one. Of these nine patients, five were assigned to the transplantation group and four to the conventional-chemotherapy group.
Therefore, of the 199 randomized patients, 184 were included in the primary analysis; 101 had been assigned to autologous stem-cell transplantation and 83 to conventional-dose chemotherapy (Table 1Table 1
Characteristics of the Patients.). After induction chemotherapy, 24 percent of these 184 patients were in complete remission. No significant differences between the two treatment groups were found with respect to demographic and stratification factors, including age, predominant site of metastasis, or estrogen-receptor status. In addition, the two groups were well balanced with respect to prior treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant hormonal therapy, and hormonal therapy for metastatic disease. The numbers of patients with complete or partial responses did not differ significantly between the treatment groups; however, the number of patients who underwent randomization while in complete remission was small.Twenty of the 184 eligible randomized patients (11 percent) refused their treatment assignment. Of the 101 patients assigned to undergo autologous stem-cell transplantation, 6 (6 percent) refused the therapy; 5 received either no therapy or conventional-dose chemotherapy, and 1 patient underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation with an alternative regimen. In comparison, of the 83 patients assigned to receive conventional-dose chemotherapy, 14 patients (17 percent) refused the therapy. Ten underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation (all of whom relapsed and eight of whom died), three patients received no therapy, and in the case of one patient the data were insufficient to determine the result of off-protocol therapy. In addition, three patients who received conventional-dose chemotherapy subsequently received high-dose chemotherapy and underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation after relapse.
Outcome
By April 1999, 114 deaths had occurred among the 184 eligible randomized patients. The median follow-up was 37 months (minimum, 4; maximum, 96). The median follow-up for the 70 patients who were alive at that time was 25 months. The median number of cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil received by the group assigned to conventional-dose chemotherapy was 8 (range, 1 to 24).
The 3-year survival rate, calculated from the date of randomization, among all 184 eligible patients was 33 percent, and the median survival was 25 months. As Figure 2Figure 2
Kaplan–Meier Estimates of Overall Survival of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Who Were Randomly Assigned to Treatment with Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy Alone or High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation. shows, there was no significant difference in survival between the two treatment groups (P=0.23, with stratification according to response to induction chemotherapy). The median survival in the group treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cells was 24 months, with a 3-year survival rate of 32 percent. The median survival in the conventional-chemotherapy group was 26 months, with a 3-year survival rate of 38 percent. The results were similar when the analysis included all 199 patients who underwent randomization (P=0.14, with stratification according to the response to induction chemotherapy).Similarly, there were no significant differences in survival between the two treatment groups when the groups were analyzed according to the extent of the response to induction chemotherapy (complete or partial), age (≤42 years or >42 years), estrogen-receptor status (negative or positive), or predominant site of metastatic disease (visceral or other). Among patients who were older than 42 years, those who received conventional-dose chemotherapy appeared to have a survival advantage over those who received high-dose chemotherapy and underwent stem-cell transplantation. Since this analysis was within a subgroup, the results must be interpreted with caution. Patients consistently had a higher rate of survival if they were in complete remission at the time of randomization, but there was no significant difference in the rates between the two treatment groups (Table 2Table 2
Rates of Overall Survival and Progression-free Survival at Three Years.).As Figure 3Figure 3
Kaplan–Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Who Were Randomly Assigned to Treatment with Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy Alone or High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation. shows, there was no significant difference in the time to progression in the two treatment groups (P=0.31, with stratification according to response to induction chemotherapy). The median time to progression for patients who received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cells was 9.6 months, and the 3-year rate of progression-free survival was 6 percent. The median time to progression for the group given conventional chemotherapy was 9.0 months, and the 3-year rate of progression-free survival was 12 percent. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the time to progression within the various subgroups. Again, the patients who were in complete remission before randomization fared better than those who were in partial remission (Table 2). The results were similar when the analysis included all 199 randomized patients (P=0.30, with stratification according to response to induction chemotherapy).One hundred thirty-nine patients were in partial remission at the time of randomization, 72 of whom were assigned to high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell transplantation and 67 of whom were assigned to conventional-dose chemotherapy. Of these 139, 12 subsequently had a complete remission: 5 after receiving high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cells (7 percent of the 72 patients in this group who were in partial remission at randomization) and 7 after treatment with conventional-dose chemotherapy (10 percent of the 67 patients in this group who were in partial remission at randomization). There was no significant difference in the rate of conversion to complete remission with these two treatments.
Table 3Table 3
Incidence of Moderate and Severe Adverse Effects after Randomization. shows the incidence of moderate and severe, but nonfatal, adverse effects in the two groups. Patients who underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation had a higher rate of severe leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia as well as infection, diarrhea, and vomiting than those who received conventional-dose chemotherapy. The incidence of severe mucositis was similar in the two groups. No lethal adverse effects were reported in the conventional-chemotherapy group. One patient died from venoocclusive disease of the liver 49 days after autologous stem-cell transplantation.Discussion
Our findings demonstrate that women with metastatic breast cancer who have a complete or partial response to standard chemotherapy and then receive high-dose chemotherapy and undergo autologous stem-cell transplantation do not survive longer or have a longer time to progression of disease than women who receive maintenance therapy with conventional doses of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. The incidence of nonfatal but serious adverse effects was greater in the group assigned to high-dose chemotherapy plus transplantation, in which myelosuppression, infection, diarrhea, and vomiting were common. Even so, the treatment-related mortality (i.e., deaths occurring within 100 days after the initiation of therapy) was virtually the same in the two groups.
The study was designed to have a high power to detect a doubling in median survival with high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell transplantation. Nonetheless, our data show that this treatment was unlikely to be associated with even a moderate improvement (e.g., a 6-month increase in median survival, from 24 months to 30 months), even when the possible effect of noncompliance was taken into consideration. The number of patients who survived for three years without signs of disease progression was so low that it is unlikely that the results will change significantly with continued follow-up. In addition, the treatment-related mortality rate of less than 1 percent after high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell transplantation could not have influenced the survival results. And since the methods we used for high-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem-cell rescue are the current standard approach, our results should reflect outcomes being obtained currently.
The fact that a substantial proportion of enrolled patients withdrew from the study and thus did not receive the assigned treatment is potentially problematic. In published studies of patients with acute myeloid leukemia who received stem-cell transplantation, 33 to 50 percent of the patients who were initially in complete remission declined to undergo randomization and were withdrawn.13 The rate was similar in our study: approximately 28 percent declined to undergo randomization. No substantial difference in the distribution of known prognostic factors was found between the patients who remained in the study and those with a complete response or a partial response who declined to undergo randomization.
Though there was no discernible difference in outcome with the two treatments for patients who had a complete response to induction chemotherapy, the number of such patients was admittedly small — 45 patients in all, 29 in the group treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell transplantation and 16 in the group treated with conventional-dose chemotherapy. A number of ongoing studies may be able to provide more information on this subgroup of patients with complete responses. Nevertheless, the likelihood that a significant difference in outcome will be found is low. Moreover, the difficulty of enrolling patients in a randomized trial of this sort is so great that any conclusions that are drawn may ultimately require extrapolation of the results of completed or ongoing trials involving high-risk patients with primary breast cancer.
It is possible that the promising results of pilot studies of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell rescue were due in part to selection bias.14-16 Patients undergoing this treatment for metastatic breast cancer are generally younger and healthier, and have had better responses to induction chemotherapy, than those who are treated with conventional therapies. To account for selection bias, we analyzed our results on an intention-to-treat basis. Even so, the outcomes were no different for the 106 patients who actually received high-dose chemotherapy and underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation than for the 101 patients who were randomly assigned to the treatment.
A French multicenter, randomized trial, which compared a single course of high-dose chemotherapy plus stem-cell rescue with conventional-dose chemotherapy for patients with chemotherapy-responsive metastatic breast cancer, was stopped prematurely after the enrollment of 61 patients because of a low rate of enrollment.17 After five years of follow-up, there was no significant difference between the groups in progression-free survival (9 percent in each group) or overall survival (29.8 percent in the group treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell rescue and 18.5 percent in the conventional-chemotherapy group, P=0.12). This small trial had a low statistical power to detect large differences, but the design was similar to ours. Our results contradict those of an earlier, single-center trial that purported to find an advantage of tandem cycles of high-dose chemotherapy.18 This study is now under review as part of a misconduct investigation.19
A number of other randomized studies of patients with metastatic breast cancer are ongoing, and the results of several studies of patients with locally advanced but not metastatic breast cancer have yet to be reported. Our results should be interpreted in the context of those trials and cannot and should not be extrapolated to patients with nonmetastatic cancer who have multiple positive axillary nodes.
Our results lead us to conclude that the routine practice of administering several cycles of conventional induction chemotherapy followed by a single course of high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue cannot be recommended for women with metastatic breast cancer. Alternative strategies to improve the results of this therapy are being evaluated and include efforts to minimize the development of resistance to chemotherapy during induction chemotherapy; attempts to improve the processing and purging of stem cells; post-transplantation chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and immune modulation to eliminate minimal residual disease; and the use of multiple cycles of dose-intensive therapy. These and other approaches should be investigated in well-designed trials to improve the treatment options and outlook for patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Supported in part by an unrestricted grant from U.S. Healthcare, Blue Bell, Pa., and by Public Health Service grants (CA15488, CA23318, CA16520, CA42777, CA32102, CA27525, CA13650, CA07190, CA66636, and CA21115) from the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, and the Department of Health and Human Services. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute. The study was coordinated by ECOG (Robert L. Comis, M.D., chairman).
We are indebted to Susan Allen and Donna Neuberg, Sc.D., of the ECOG Coordinating and Statistical Centers for their diligent efforts in the detailed review of data on patients and compliance with the protocol. This article is dedicated to the memory of Rob Krigel, M.D., colleague and friend.
Source Information
From the University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center, Philadelphia (E.A.S., C.S., J.H.G.); Dana–Farber Cancer Institute, Boston (A.O.); Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia (L.J.G.); Hahnemann University, Philadelphia (P.A.C., I.B.); Temple University, Philadelphia (K.F.M.); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. (J.N.I.); John Wayne Cancer Institute, Santa Monica, Calif. (S.M.); University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland (H.M.L.); and Tufts–New England Medical Center, Boston (J.K.E.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Stadtmauer at the Bone Marrow and Stem Cell Transplant Program, University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center, 16 Penn Tower, 3400 Spruce St., Philadelphia, PA 19104, or at stadtmau@mail.med.upenn.edu.
Other members of the Philadelphia Bone Marrow Transplant Group are listed in the Appendix.
Other authors were Selina M. Luger, M.D., University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center, Philadelphia; Thomas R. Klumpp, M.D., Temple University, Philadelphia; Mark R. Litzow, M.D., Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.; and David L. Topolsky, M.D., Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia.
Appendix
The following members of the Philadelphia Bone Marrow Transplant Group also participated in the study: University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center: J. Bird, D.L. Porter, P.A. Mangan, and P.A. Cassileth; Fox Chase Cancer Center: M. Daly, R. Krigel (deceased), and R. Schilder; Hahnemann University Hospital: M. Styler, and D. Marks; Temple University Hospital: S. Goldberg and L. Glenn; and Christiana Cancer Center: D. Biggs.
- References
References
1
Greenberg PA ,Hortobagyi GN ,Smith TL ,Ziegler LD ,Frye DK ,Buzdar AU . Long-term follow-up of patients with complete remission following combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:2197-2205
Web of Science | Medline2
Peters WP ,Shpall EJ ,Jones RB , et al. High-dose combination alkylating agents with bone marrow support as initial treatment for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1988;6:1368-1376
Web of Science | Medline3
Williams SF ,Mick R ,Desser R ,Golick J ,Beschorner J ,Bitran JD . High-dose consolidation therapy with autologous stem cell rescue in stage IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1989;7:1824-1830
Web of Science | Medline4
Kennedy MJ ,Beveridge RA ,Rowley SD ,Gordon GB ,Abeloff MD ,Davidson NE . High-dose chemotherapy with reinfusion of purged autologous bone marrow following dose-intense induction as initial therapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991;83:920-926
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline5
Antman K ,Ayash L ,Elias A , et al. A phase II study of high-dose cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin with autologous marrow support in women with measurable advanced breast cancer responding to standard-dose therapy. J Clin Oncol 1992;10:102-110
Web of Science | Medline6
Williams SF ,Gilewski T ,Mick R ,Bitran JD . High-dose consolidation therapy with autologous stem-cell rescue in stage IV breast cancer: follow-up report. J Clin Oncol 1992;10:1743-1747
Web of Science | Medline7
Antman KH ,Rowlings PA ,Vaughan WP , et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem-cell support for breast cancer in North America. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:1870-1879
Web of Science | Medline8
Distribution and frequencies of autotransplants performed between 1992 and 1997 and registered with the ABMTR. Vol. 5. ABMTR Newsletter. December 1998:5. (Milwaukee: IBMTR/ABMTR Statistical Center.)
9
Thomas ED ,Storb R . Technique for human marrow grafting. Blood 1970;36:507-515
Web of Science | Medline10
Eder JP ,Elias A ,Shea TC , et al. A phase I-II study of cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin with autologous bone marrow transplantation in solid tumor patients. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1239-1245
Web of Science | Medline11
O'Brien PC ,Fleming TR . A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 1979;35:549-556
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline12
Jennison C ,Turnbull BW . Interim analyses: the repeated confidence interval approach. J R Stat Soc [B] 1989;51:305-36113
Cassileth PA ,Harrington DP ,Appelbaum FR , et al. Chemotherapy compared with autologous or allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in the management of acute myeloid leukemia in first remission. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1649-1656
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline14
Rahman ZU ,Frye DK ,Buzdar AU , et al. Impact of selection process on response rate and long-term survival of potential high-dose chemotherapy candidates treated with standard-dose doxorubicin-containing chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:3171-3177
Web of Science | Medline15
Garcia-Carbonero R ,Hidalgo M ,Paz-Artes L , et al. Patient selection in high-dose chemotherapy trials: relevance in high-risk breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:3178-3184
Web of Science | Medline16
Crump M ,Goss PE ,Prince M ,Girouard C . Outcome of extensive evaluation before adjuvant therapy in women with breast cancer and 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:66-69
Web of Science | Medline17
Lotz JP ,Cure H ,Janvier M , et al. High-dose chemotherapy (HD-CT) with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for metastatic breast cancer (MBC): results of the French Protocol PEGASE 04. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999;18:43a-43a abstract.18
Bezwoda WR ,Seymour L ,Dansey RD . High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic rescue as primary treatment for metastatic breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1995;13:2483-2489
Web of Science | Medline19
Researcher under investigation. Press release of the University of the Witwatersrand Medical School, Johannesburg, South Africa, February 3, 2000. (See http://www.wits.ac.za/depts/wcs/media/index.htm.)
- Citing Articles (116)
Citing Articles
1
Rachel Eshima Mckay, Marc Rozner. (2011) Negotiating the Unanticipated Costs of Success. Anesthesia & Analgesia 113:5, 984-986
CrossRef2
Qiang Zhang. (2011) Repeated Confidence Intervals Under Fractional Brownian Motion in Long-Term Clinical Trials. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation 40:8, 1130-1145
CrossRef3
Erin M. Olson, Nancy U. Lin, Ian E. Krop, Eric P. Winer. (2011) The ethical use of mandatory research biopsies. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 8:10, 620-625
CrossRef4
Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Manuel Hidalgo, Razelle Kurzrock. (2011) The inverted pyramid of biomarker-driven trials. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 8:9, 562-566
CrossRef5
Antonia M.S. Müller, Holbrook E.K. Kohrt, Steven Cha, Ginna Laport, Jared Klein, Alice E. Guardino, Laura J. Johnston, Keith E. Stockerl-Goldstein, Elie Hanania, Christopher Juttner, Karl G. Blume, Robert S. Negrin, Irving L. Weissman, Judith A. Shizuru. (2011) Long-Term Outcome of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated with High-Dose Chemotherapy and Transplantation of Purified Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cells. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation
CrossRef6
O A Khan, A D Blann, M J Payne, M R Middleton, A S Protheroe, D C Talbot, M Taylor, C Han, M Patil, A L Harris. (2011) Continuous low-dose cyclophosphamide and methotrexate combined with celecoxib for patients with advanced cancer. British Journal of Cancer 104:12, 1822-1827
CrossRef7
Yee Chung Cheng, Naoto T. Ueno. (2011) Improvement of survival and prospect of cure in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer
CrossRef8
Leslie Levin, Ron Goeree, Mark Levine, Murray Krahn, Tony Easty, Adalstein Brown, David Henry. (2011) Coverage with evidence development: The Ontario experience. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 27:02, 159-168
CrossRef9
Miller, Franklin G., Joffe, Steven, . (2011) Equipoise and the Dilemma of Randomized Clinical Trials. New England Journal of Medicine 364:5, 476-480
Full Text10
A Yoshimi, R Suzuki, Y Atsuta, M Iida, D-P Lu, W Tong, A Ghavamzadeh, K Alimoghaddam, A K W Lie, R Liang, L L Chan, L Haipeng, P-L Tan, W Y K Hwang, T-J Chiou, P-M Chen, T Van Binh, N N Minh, C-K Min, T J Hwang, Y Kodera. (2010) Hematopoietic SCT activity in Asia: a report from the Asia-Pacific Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group. Bone Marrow Transplantation 45:12, 1682-1691
CrossRef11
Vera S. Donnenberg, Ludovic Zimmerlin, Joseph Peter Rubin, Albert D. Donnenberg. (2010) Regenerative Therapy After Cancer: What Are the Risks?. Tissue Engineering Part B: Reviews 16:6, 567-575
CrossRef12
Michael S. Lauer. (2010) The historical and moral imperatives of comparative effectiveness research. Statistics in Medicine 29:19, 1982-1984
CrossRef13
Yee Chung Cheng, Naoto T Ueno. (2010) Is high-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in breast cancer patients a done deal?. Women's Health 6:4, 481-485
CrossRef14
Penny E. Mohr, Sean R. Tunis. (2010) Access with Evidence Development. PharmacoEconomics 28:2, 153-162
CrossRef15
Paige L. Dorn, Steven J. Chmura. (2010) Breast Cancer Oligometastases: A Rationale for Aggressive Local Therapy. Breast Diseases: A Year Book Quarterly 21:2, 115-118
CrossRef16
Yee Chung Cheng, Gabriela Rondón, Leah F. Sanchez, John D. McMannis, Daniel R. Couriel, Marcos J. Lima, Chitra Hosing, Issa F. Khouri, Sergio A. Giralt, Richard E. Champlin, Naoto T. Ueno. (2009) Interleukin-2 and granulocyte–macrophage–colony-stimulating factor immunomodulation with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for patients with metastatic breast cancer. International Journal of Hematology 90:5, 627-634
CrossRef17
Y Kishida, M Kawahara, S Teramukai, K Kubota, K Komuta, K Minato, T Mio, Y Fujita, T Yonei, K Nakano, M Tsuboi, K Shibata, S Atagi, T Kawaguchi, K Furuse, M Fukushima. (2009) Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia as a prognostic factor in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from Japan Multinational Trial Organization LC00-03. British Journal of Cancer 101:9, 1537-1542
CrossRef18
Amelia Ramon-Lopez, Ricardo Nalda-Molina, Belen Valenzuela, Juan Jose Perez-Ruixo. (2009) Semi-Mechanistic Model for Neutropenia after High Dose of Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients. Pharmaceutical Research 26:8, 1952-1962
CrossRef19
Yago Nieto, Elizabeth J Shpall. (2009) High-dose chemotherapy for high-risk primary and metastatic breast cancer: is another look warranted?. Current Opinion in Oncology 21:2, 150-157
CrossRef20
Bruce J. Giantonio, Arlene A. Forastiere, Robert L. Comis. (2008) The Role of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group in Establishing Standards of Cancer Care: Over 50 Years of Progress Through Clinical Research. Seminars in Oncology 35:5, 494-506
CrossRef21
Robert J. Gray. 2008. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG). .
CrossRef22
C.S. Denlinger, L.J. Goldstein. (2008) Intensive Dose-dense Compared With High-dose Adjuvant Chemotherapy for High-risk Operable Breast Cancer: Southwest Oncology Group/Intergroup Study 9623. Breast Diseases: A Year Book Quarterly 19:1, 87-88
CrossRef23
P Biron, M Durand, H Roché, T Delozier, C Battista, P Fargeot, D Spaeth, T Bachelot, E Poiget, F Monnot, M L Tanguy, H Curé. (2008) Pegase 03: a prospective randomized phase III trial of FEC with or without high-dose thiotepa, cyclophosphamide and autologous stem cell transplantation in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transplantation 41:6, 555-562
CrossRef24
N T Ueno, J D Rizzo, T Demirer, Y C Cheng, U Hegenbart, M-J Zhang, M Bregni, A Carella, D Blaise, A Bashey, J D Bitran, B J Bolwell, G J Elfenbein, K K Fields, C O Freytes, R P Gale, H M Lazarus, R E Champlin, P J Stiff, D Niederwieser. (2008) Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for metastatic breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transplantation 41:6, 537-545
CrossRef25
J. Peppercorn. (2008) Quality of life and quality-adjusted survival (Q-TWiST) in patients receiving dose-intensive or standard dose chemotherapy for high-risk primary breast cancer. Breast Diseases: A Year Book Quarterly 19:3, 279-280
CrossRef26
P. Saintigny, F. Selle, J. Gligorov, N. Pecuchet, B. Oudet, J. -P. Lotz. (2007) Intensité de dose dans le traitement du cancer du sein. Oncologie 9:12, 814-820
CrossRef27
Paolo Pedrazzoli, Giovanni Rosti, Simona Secondino, Ornella Carminati, Taner Demirer. (2007) High-Dose Chemotherapy With Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Support for Solid Tumors in Adults. Seminars in Hematology 44:4, 286-295
CrossRef28
Abdulgadir K. Adam, Mahmud Zamlut, Ayman O. Soubani. (2007) The Yield and Safety of Thoracentesis in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients. Lung 185:5, 257-262
CrossRef29
Ian Nivison-Smith, Kenneth F. Bradstock, Anthony J. Dodds, Patricia A. Hawkins, David D.F. Ma, John J. Moore, Judy M. Simpson, Jeff Szer. (2007) Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Australia and New Zealand, 1992-2004. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 13:8, 905-912
CrossRef30
Kristen M. Snyder, Crystal L. Mackall. (2007) Therapy for metastatic ESFT: Is it time to ask new questions?. Pediatric Blood & Cancer 49:2, 115-116
CrossRef31
I Craig Henderson, Vinona Bhatia. (2007) Nab-paclitaxel for breast cancer: a new formulation with an improved safety profile and greater efficacy. Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 7:7, 919-943
CrossRef32
P. Schmid. (2007) Hochdosischemotherapie beim Mammakarzinom. Der Onkologe 13:5, 409-424
CrossRef33
Erica L. Mayer, Harold J. Burstein. (2007) Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America 21:2, 257-272
CrossRef34
ISAO HARA, HIDEAKI MIYAKE, YUJI YAMADA, ATSUSHI TAKENAKA, MASATO FUJISAWA. (2006) High-dose chemotherapy for male germ cell tumor. International Journal of Urology 13:8, 1037-1044
CrossRef35
M. MacGuill, E. Mulligan, N. Ravi, S. Rowley, P. J. Byrne, D. Hollywood, J. Kennedy, P. N. Keeling, J. V. Reynolds. (2006) Clinicopathologic factors predicting complete pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer. Diseases of the Esophagus 19:4, 273-276
CrossRef36
D. A. Hess, H. M. Klomp. (2006) The role of surgery for pulmonary metastases in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Online 9:08,
CrossRef37
J J Vredenburgh, B Madan, D Coniglio, M Ross, G Broadwater, D Niedzwiecki, J Edwards, L Marks, R Vandemark, C McDonald, M L Affronti, W P Peters. (2006) A randomized phase III comparative trial of immediate consolidation with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell support compared to observation with delayed consolidation in women with metastatic breast cancer and only bone metastases following intensive induction chemotherapy. Bone Marrow Transplantation 37:11, 1009-1015
CrossRef38
D T Vogl, E A Stadtmauer. (2006) High-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for metastatic breast cancer: a therapy whose time has passed. Bone Marrow Transplantation 37:11, 985-987
CrossRef39
C Bengala, C Zamagni, P Pedrazzoli, P Matteucci, A Ballestrero, G Da Prada, M Martino, G Rosti, M Danova, M Bregni, G Jovic, V Guarneri, M Maur, P F Conte. (2006) Cardiac toxicity of trastuzumab in metastatic breast cancer patients previously treated with high-dose chemotherapy: a retrospective study. British Journal of Cancer 94:7, 1016-1020
CrossRef40
James J. Vredenburgh, David Coniglio, Gloria Broadwater, Roy B. Jones, Maureen Ross, Elizabeth J. Shpall, Atif Hussein, David Rizzieri, Larry B. Marks, Colleen Gilbert, Mary Lou Affronti, Sarah Moore, Carolyn McDonald, William P. Petros, William P. Peters. (2006) Consolidation with High-Dose Combination Alkylating Agents with Bone Marrow Transplantation Significantly Improves Disease-Free Survival in Hormone-Insensitive Metastatic Breast Cancer in Complete Remission Compared with Intensive Standard-Dose Chemotherapy Alone. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 12:2, 195-203
CrossRef41
Bekele Afessa, Steve G. Peters. (2005) Chronic Lung Disease After Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation. Clinics in Chest Medicine 26:4, 571-586
CrossRef42
Gregorio Angel Martin-Henao, Carlos Torrico, Carmen Azqueta, Begona Amill, Sergio Querol, Juan Garcia. (2005) Cryopreservation of hematopoietic progenitor cells from apheresis at high cell concentrations does not impair the hematopoietic recovery after transplantation. Transfusion 45:12, 1917-1924
CrossRef43
H. J. Stemmler, H. Menzel, C. Salat, H. Lindhofer, S. Kahlert, V. Heinemann, H. J. Kolb. (2005) Lasting remission following multimodal treatment in a patient with metastatic breast cancer. Anti-Cancer Drugs 16:10, 1135-1137
CrossRef44
Michael Heuser, Arnold Ganser. (2005) Colony-stimulating factors in the management of neutropenia and its complications. Annals of Hematology 84:11, 697-708
CrossRef45
Jeffrey Peppercorn, James Herndon, Alice B. Kornblith, William Peters, Tim Ahles, James Vredenburgh, Gary Schwartz, Elizabeth Shpall, David D. Hurd, Jimmie Holland, Eric Winer, . (2005) Quality of life among patients with Stage II and III breast carcinoma randomized to receive high-dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow support or intermediate-dose chemotherapy. Cancer 104:8, 1580-1589
CrossRef46
Claudine Isaacs, Rebecca Slack, Edmund Gehan, Karen Ballen, Ralph Boccia, Ellen Areman, Ruthie Kramer, Daniel F. Hayes, Herbert Herscowitz, Marc Lippman. (2005) A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Interleukin-2 Activated Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation and Post-transplant IL-2 for High Risk Breast Cancer Patients. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 93:2, 125-134
CrossRef47
Cindy Farquhar, Jane Marjoribanks, Russell Basser, Sarah E Hetrick, Anne Lethaby, Cindy Farquhar. 2005. High dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation versus conventional chemotherapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. .
CrossRef48
Richard Childs, Ramaprasad Srinivasan. (2005) High-dose chemotherapy and allogeneic immunotherapy. The Lancet 366:9482, 273-275
CrossRef49
Robert O. Dillman, Neil M. Barth, Louis A. VanderMolen, Kanoe Allen, Linda D. Beutel, Sherri Chico. (2005) High-Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Rescue for Metastatic Breast Cancer. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 28:3, 281-288
CrossRef50
Claude Sportès, Nicole J. McCarthy, Frances Hakim, Seth M. Steinberg, David J. Liewehr, David Weng, Shivaani Kummar, Juan Gea-Banacloche, Catherine K. Chow, Robert M. Dean, Kathleen M. Castro, Donna Marchigiani, Michael R. Bishop, Daniel H. Fowler, Ronald E. Gress. (2005) Establishing a Platform for Immunotherapy: Clinical Outcome and Study of Immune Reconstitution after High-Dose Chemotherapy with Progenitor Cell Support in Breast Cancer Patients. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 11:6, 472-483
CrossRef51
Yago Nieto, Elizabeth J. Shpall, Scott I. Bearman, Roy B. Jones. (2005) Evaluation of the Effect of Age on Treatment-Related Mortality and Relapse in Patients With High-Risk Primary Breast Cancer Receiving High-Dose Chemotherapy. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 28:3, 248-254
CrossRef52
P. Nieboer, E.G.E. de Vries, N.H. Mulder, W.T.A. van der Graaf. (2005) Relevance of high-dose chemotherapy in solid tumours. Cancer Treatment Reviews 31:3, 210-225
CrossRef53
Hee-Jung Sohn, Sang-Hee Kim, Gyeong-Won Lee, Shin Kim, Hye Jin Kang, Jin-Hee Ahn, Sung-Bae Kim, Sang-We Kim, Woo Kun Kim, Cheolwon Suh. (2005) High-Dose Chemotherapy of Cyclophosphamide, Thiotepa, and Carboplatin (CTCb) Followed by Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation for Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: A 6-Year Follow-Up Result. Cancer Research and Treatment 37:1, 24
CrossRef54
William R. Sellers, Alex Matter. 2004. Cancer Drug Development in the Modern Era. .
CrossRef55
Salomon M. Stemmer, Izhar Hardan, Harry J. Brenner, Shulamith Rizel. (2004) High-Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplant in Women With De Novo Chemosensitive Metastatic Breast Cancer. American Journal of Clinical Oncology 27:3, 250-255
CrossRef56
Tadashi Ikeda, Hiromitsu Jinno, Masaki Kitajima. (2004) The evolution of primary chemotherapy in breast cancer treatment. Breast Cancer 11:2, 148-155
CrossRef57
Yago Nieto, Roy B Jones, Elizabeth J Shpall. (2004) High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer: is another look warranted?. Current Opinion in Oncology 16:2, 114-119
CrossRef58
E. Haavi Morreim. (2004) About Face: Downplaying the Role of the Press in Facial Transplantation Research. The American Journal of Bioethics 4:3, 27-29
CrossRef59
A. Nicolini, A. Carpi. (2003) Advanced breast cancer: an update and controversies on diagnosis and therapy. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy 57:10, 439-446
CrossRef60
Tobias Neff, Peter A. Horn, Laura J. Peterson, Bobbie M. Thomasson, Jesse Thompson, David A. Williams, Manfred Schmidt, George E. Georges, Christof von Kalle, Hans-Peter Kiem. (2003) Methylguanine methyltransferase–mediated in vivo selection and chemoprotection of allogeneic stem cells in a large-animal model. Journal of Clinical Investigation 112:10, 1581-1588
CrossRef61
Filippo Montemurro, Gabriela Rondón, Mark Munsell, Terry L Smith, Michele L Donato, James L Gajewski, Zia U Rahman, Aman U Buzdar, Richard E Champlin, Naoto T Ueno. (2003) Predicting outcome based on swenerton score in patients with metastatic breast cancer undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: implications for patient selection. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 9:5, 330-340
CrossRef62
Motonari Kondo, Amy J. Wagers, Markus G. Manz, Susan S. Prohaska, David C. Scherer, Georg F. Beilhack, Judith A. Shizuru, Irving L. Weissman. (2003) B
IOLOGY OF HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELLS AND PROGENITORS : Implications for Clinical Application. Annual Review of Immunology 21:1, 759-806
CrossRef63
John O. Ojeifo, Aiguo G. Wu, Herbert B. Herscowitz, Kenneth R. Meehan. (2003) Phenotypic and Immunologic Characteristics of Docetaxel-Mobilized Peripheral Blood Stem Cells in Mice. Journal of Hematotherapy <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Stem Cell Research 12:2, 189-197
CrossRef64
Semir Beslija. (2003) The Role of Anthracyclines/Anthraquinones in Metastatic Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 81:S1, 25-32
CrossRef65
Per Eystein Lønning. (2003) Study of suboptimum treatment response: lessons from breast cancer. The Lancet Oncology 4:3, 177-185
CrossRef66
Edward A. Stadtmauer. (2003) High Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Metastatic Breast Cancer: Is there a Place?. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 81:S1, 111-115
CrossRef67
PHILIP HAHNFELDT, JUDAH FOLKMAN, LYNN HLATKY. (2003) Minimizing Long-Term Tumor Burden: The Logic for Metronomic Chemotherapeutic Dosing and its Antiangiogenic Basis. Journal of Theoretical Biology 220:4, 545-554
CrossRef68
Frederick R. Appelbaum. (2003) The Current Status of Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. Annual Review of Medicine 54:1, 491-512
CrossRef69
Jerry Menikoff. (2003) The hidden alternative: getting investigational treatments off-study. The Lancet 361:9351, 63-67
CrossRef70
Walter Jonat. (2003) Adjuvant Therapy for Early Breast Cancer in Pre-/Perimenopausal Women. American Journal of Cancer 2:4, 227-235
CrossRef71
Laura Assersohn, Stephen R D Johnston. (2003) Postmenopausal Metastatic Breast Cancer. American Journal of Cancer 2:2, 95-109
CrossRef72
S. Joffe. (2002) Views of American Oncologists About the Purposes of Clinical Trials. CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment 94:24, 1847-1853
CrossRef73
Leisha A. Emens, M. John Kennedy, John H. Fetting, Nancy E. Davidson, Elizabeth Garrett, Deborah K. Armstrong. (2002) A Phase I Toxicity and Feasibility Trial of Sequential Dose-Dense Induction Chemotherapy with Doxorubicin, Paclitaxel, and 5-Fluorouracil Followed by High Dose Consolidation for High-Risk Primary Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 76:2, 145-156
CrossRef74
C Farquhar, R Basser, S Hetrick, A Lethaby, J Marjoribanks. 2002. High dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or stem cell transplantation versus conventional chemotherapy for women with metastatic breast cancer. .
CrossRef75
Michael W Schuster, Roy Beveridge, Debra Frei-Lahr, Camille N Abboud, Scott Cruickshank, Michael Macri, Dora Menchaca, Jeannine Holden, Edmund K Waller. (2002) The effects of pegylated recombinant human megakaryocyte growth and development factor (PEG-rHuMGDF) on platelet recovery in breast cancer patients undergoing autologous bone marrow transplantation. Experimental Hematology 30:9, 1044-1050
CrossRef76
Pehr A. Lind, Lawrence B. Marks, Timothy A. Jamieson, Dennis L. Carter, James J. Vredenburgh, Rodney J. Folz, Leonard R. Prosnitz. (2002) Predictors for pneumonitis during locoregional radiotherapy in high-risk patients with breast carcinoma treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue. Cancer 94:11, 2821-2829
CrossRef77
Patricia A. Ganz. (2002) What Outcomes Matter to Patients. Medical Care 40:Supplement, III-11-III-19
CrossRef78
Dale F. Kraemer, David Fortin, Edward A. Neuwelt. (2002) Chemotherapeutic dose intensification for treatment of malignant brain tumors: Recent developments and future directions. Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports 2:3, 216-224
CrossRef79
H Gurney. (2002) How to calculate the dose of chemotherapy. British Journal of Cancer 86:8, 1297-1302
CrossRef80
Helen K Chew. (2002) Medical Management of Breast Cancer: Today and Tomorrow. Cancer Biotherapy & Radiopharmaceuticals 17:2, 137-149
CrossRef81
Yicheng Zhang, Michael Crump, Stuart A. Berger. (2002) Purging of Contaminating Breast Cancer Cells From Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell Preparations Using Activation Enhanced Cell Death. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 72:3, 265-278
CrossRef82
Robert A Wolff. (2002) Exploiting molecular targets in pancreatic cancer. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America 16:1, 139-157
CrossRef83
Giovanni Rosti, Patrizia Ferrante, Jonathan Ledermann, Serge Leyvraz, Ruth Ladenstein, Ewa Koscileniak, John Crown, Claudio Dazzi, Anna Cariello, Maurizio Marangolo. (2002) High-dose chemotherapy for solid tumors: results of the EBMT. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology 41:2, 129-140
CrossRef84
Patrice Viens, Dominique Maraninchi. (2002) High-dose chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology 41:2, 141-149
CrossRef85
A Gratwohl, H Baldomero, A Urbano-Ispizua. (2002) Transplantation in chronic myeloid leukaemia. The Lancet 359:9307, 712-713
CrossRef86
Elisabet Lidbrink, Jonas Bergh. (2002) Chemotherapy of Breast Cancer. American Journal of Cancer 1:3, 165-171
CrossRef87
Renee M. Gerrero, Steven Stein, Edward A. Stadtmauer. (2002) High-Dose Chemotherapy and Stem Cell Support for Breast Cancer. Drugs & Aging 19:7, 475-485
CrossRef88
Manfred Hensel, Andreas Schneeweiss, Hans-Peter Sinn, Gerlinde Egerer, Martin Kornacker, Erich Solomayer, Rainer Haas, Gunther Bastert, Anthony D. Ho. (2002) Stem Cell Dose and Tumorbiologic Parameters as Prognostic Markers for Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Undergoing High-Dose Chemotherapy with Autologous Blood Stem Cell Support. Stem Cells 20:1, 32-40
CrossRef89
Kazuhiro Tanaka, Aiko Katayama, Akio Sakamoto, Shuichi Matsuda, Yukihide Iwamoto, Hirokazu Chuman, Noriko Urano. (2002) Treatment of Chemosensitive-Sarcoma Patients with Metastases at Diagnosis: Possible Prognostic Value of Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation.. Orthopedics & Traumatology 51:4, 860-864
CrossRef90
Keren Osman, Raymond L. Comenzo. 2002. Stem Cell Transplantation. , 253-263.
CrossRef91
Alwin D. R. Huitema, Ron A. A. Mathôt, Matthijs M. Tibben, Sjoerd Rodenhuis, Jos H. Beijnen. (2001) Validation of a Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Strategy for Thiotepa in a High-Dose Chemotherapy Regimen. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring 23:6, 650-657
CrossRef92
A. Bashey, S. Sundaram, S. Corringham, V. Jones, D. Lancaster, J. Silva-Gietzen, P. Law, E.D. Ball. (2001) Use of Capecitabine as First-Line Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Relapsing After High- Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Support. Clinical Oncology 13:6, 434-437
CrossRef93
Jose Luis P
rez-Gracia, Ramon Colomer, Emilio Esteban, Ram
CrossRef94
Wolfgang Hinterberger, Margareta Hinterberger-Fischer. (2001) Blood stem cell transplantation for breast cancer: new approaches using pre- peri- post-transplant immunotherapy. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 1:6, 1029-1048
CrossRef95
S.E Singletary. (2001) Minimally invasive surgery in breast cancer treatment. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy 55:9-10, 510-514
CrossRef96
S.Eva Singletary. (2001) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of stage II and III breast cancer. The American Journal of Surgery 182:4, 341-346
CrossRef97
. (2001) Vergelijking van conventionele chemotherapie met hoge-dosis chemotherapie plus stamceltransplantatie bij gemetastaseerd mammacarcinoom. Medisch-Farmaceutische Mededelingen 39:9, 180-181
CrossRef98
Steven William Glover. (2001) Biomedical information @ the speed of light: implementing desktop access to publishers’ resources at the Paterson Institute for Cancer Research. Health Information & Libraries Journal 18:2, 125-129
CrossRef99
Steven William Glover. (2001) Biomedical information @ the speed of light: implementing desktop access to publishers' resources at the Paterson Institute for Cancer Research. Health Information and Libraries Journal 18:2, 125-129
CrossRef100
Markus Dettke, Hildegard T. Greinix, Peter Kalhs, Irene Kuhrer, Nina Worel, Paul Hocker. (2001) Kinetics of PBPC mobilization by cyclophosphamide, as compared with that by epirubicin/paclitaxel followed by G-CSF support: implications for optimal timing of PBPC harvest. Transfusion 41:5, 681-686
CrossRef101
William Kruger, Nicolaus Kroger, Florian Togel, Anita Badbaran, Helmut Renges, Friederike Gieseking, Kai Gutensohn, Fritz Janicke, Axel R. Zander. (2001) Influence of Preharvest Tumor Cell Contamination in Bone Marrow or Blood Does Not Predict Resultant Tumor Cell Contamination of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Mobilized Stem Cells. Journal of Hematotherapy <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Stem Cell Research 10:2, 303-307
CrossRef102
F. Venturini, C. Alberti, M. P. Alberti, G. Scroccaro. (2001) Clinical trials in Italy: focus on the protocols submitted to Ethics Committees. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 26:2, 103-110
CrossRef103
Donna E. Reece, Kenneth A. Foon, Malaya Battacharya-Chatterjee, Doug Adkins, E. Randolph Broun, D. Gerald Connaghan, John F. Dipersio, H. Kent Holland, Dianna S. Howard, Greg A. Hale, Hans G. Klingemann, Rita K. Munn, Anastasios Raptis, Gordon L. Phillips. (2001) Interim Analysis of the Use of the Anti-Idiotype Breast Cancer Vaccine 11D10 (TriAb®) in Conjunction with Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer. Clinical Breast Cancer 2:1, 52-58
CrossRef104
Eric Lagasse, Judith A. Shizuru, Nobuko Uchida, Ann Tsukamoto, Irving L. Weissman. (2001) Toward Regenerative Medicine. Immunity 14:4, 425-436
CrossRef105
Yolanda Madarnas, Carol A. Sawka, Edmée Franssen, Georg A. Bjarnason. (2001) Are medical oncologists biased in their treatment of the large woman with breast cancer?. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 66:2, 123-133
CrossRef106
Karen H Antman. (2001) Randomized trials of high dose chemotherapy for breast cancer. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Reviews on Cancer 1471:3, M89-M98
CrossRef107
Sjoerd Rodenhuis. (2001) High-dose chemotherapy in breast cancer - interpretation of the randomized trials. Anti-Cancer Drugs 12:2, 85-88
CrossRef108
Gillian M. Keating, Karen L. Goa. (2001) Management of Advanced Breast Cancer. Disease Management and Health Outcomes 9:7, 385-402
CrossRef109
N. D. Doolittle, C. P. Anderson, W. A. Bleyer, J. G. Cairncross, T. Cloughesy, S. L. Eck, P. Guastadisegni, W. A. Hall, L. L. Muldoon, S. J. Patel, D. Peereboom, T. Siegal, E. A. Neuwelt, . (2001) Importance of dose intensity in neurooncology clinical trials: SummaryReport of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Blood-Brain Barrier DisruptionConsortium. Neuro-Oncology 3:1, 46-54
CrossRef110
Antonio C. Wolff. (2000) Systemic therapy. Current Opinion in Oncology 12:6, 532-540
CrossRef111
Jonas Bergh, Tom Wiklund, Björn Erikstein, Elisabet Lidbrink, Henrik Lindman, Per Malmström, Pirkko Kellokumpu-Lehtinen, Nils-Olof Bengtsson, Gustaf Söderlund, Gun Anker, Erik Wist, Susanne Ottosson, Eeva Salminen, Per Ljungman, Harald Holte, Jonas Nilsson, Carl Blomqvist, Nils Wilking. (2000) Tailored fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide compared with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: a randomised trial. The Lancet 356:9239, 1384-1391
CrossRef112
(2000) High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Rescue for Metastatic Breast Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 343:6, 439-441
Full Text113
Jonas Bergh. (2000) High-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer. The Lancet 356:9229, 595-596
CrossRef114
Ken Y. Yoneda, Samuel Louie, David K. Shelton. (2000) Approach to pulmonary metastases. Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine 6:4, 356-363
CrossRef115
E. Haavi Morreim. (2000) Quality of Life: Erosions and Opportunities Under Managed Care. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 28:2, 144-158
CrossRef116
Lippman, Marc E., . (2000) High-Dose Chemotherapy plus Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation for Metastatic Breast Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 342:15, 1119-1120
Full Text
- Letters
