Publication

Comparison of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) versus single-agent paclitaxel (T) as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer in women with 0-3 positive axillary nodes: CALGB 40101

Downloadable Content

Persistent URL
Last modified
  • 05/15/2025
Type of Material
Authors
    Lawrence N. Shulman, Dana-Farber Cancer InstituteDonald A. Berry, Anderson Cancer Center, HoustonConstance T. Cirrincione, Duke UniversityHeather P. Becker, University of ChicagoEdith A. Perez, Mayo ClinicRuth O'Regan, Emory UniversitySilvana Martino, The Angeles Clinic and Research InstituteCharles L. Shapiro, Ohio State UniversityCharles J. Schneider, Christiana Healthcare ServicesGretchen Kimmick, Duke UniversityHarold J. Burstein, Dana-Farber Cancer InstituteLarry Norton, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterHyman Muss, University of North Carolina at Chapel HillClifford A. Hudis, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterEric P. Winer, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Language
  • English
Date
  • 2013-05-20
Publisher
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology
Publication Version
Copyright Statement
  • © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
Final Published Version (URL)
Title of Journal or Parent Work
ISSN
  • 0732-183X
Volume
  • 31
Issue
  • 15
Start Page
  • 2311
End Page
  • 2317
Grant/Funding Information
  • Supported in part by Grants No. CA31946 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology; Monica M. Bertagnolli, MD, Chair), No. CA33601 (Alliance Statistics and Data Center; Daniel J. Sargent, PhD), No. CA25224 (North Central Cancer Treatment Group), No. CA21115 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group), and No. CA32102 (Southwest Oncology Group), as well as Grants No. CA32291, CA33601, CA25224, CA77658, CA45418, CA47577, CA77651, and CA47559 from the National Cancer Institute.
Supplemental Material (URL)
Abstract
  • PURPOSE: Optimal adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer balances efficacy and toxicity. We sought to determine whether single-agent paclitaxel (T) was inferior to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC), when each was administered for four or six cycles of therapy, and whether it offered less toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with operable breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive nodes were enrolled onto the study to address the noninferiority of single-agent T to AC, defined as the one-sided 95% upper-bound CI (UCB) of hazard ratio (HR) of T versus AC less than 1.30 for the primary end point of relapse-free survival (RFS). As a 2 × 2 factorial design, duration of therapy was also addressed and was previously reported. RESULTS: With 3,871 patients enrolled onto the trial, a median follow-up period of 6.1 years, and 437 RFS events, we achieved an HR of 1.26 (one sided 95% UCB, 1.48; favoring AC does not allow a conclusion of noninferiority of T with AC; UCB > 1.3). With 266 patient deaths, the HR for overall survival (OS) was 1.27 favoring AC (UCB, 1.56). The estimated absolute advantage of AC at 5 years is 3% for RFS (91 v 88%) and 1% for OS (95 v 94%). All nine treatment-related deaths were patients receiving AC and are included in the analyses of both RFS and OS. Hematologic toxicity was more common in patients treated with AC, and neuropathy was more common in patients treated with T. CONCLUSION: This trial did not show noninferiority of T to AC, a conclusion that is unlikely to change with additional events and follow-up. T was less toxic than AC.
Author Notes
Keywords
Research Categories
  • Health Sciences, Pharmacology
  • Health Sciences, Oncology

Tools

Relations

In Collection:

Items