Premium
Follow‐up adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy for stage II and III carcinoma of the breast
Author(s) -
Cohen Eli,
Scanlon Edward F.,
Caprini Joseph A.,
Cunningham Myles P.,
Oviedo Miguel A.,
Robinson Barry,
Knox Kerry L.
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.052
H-Index - 304
eISSN - 1097-0142
pISSN - 0008-543X
DOI - 10.1002/1097-0142(19820501)49:9<1754::aid-cncr2820490904>3.0.co;2-o
Subject(s) - medicine , melphalan , chemoimmunotherapy , chemotherapy , stage (stratigraphy) , surgery , radical mastectomy , breast cancer , adjuvant , mastectomy , breast carcinoma , cancer , oncology , cyclophosphamide , paleontology , biology
Patients with Stage II or III carcinoma of the breast were assigned to one of three adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy treatment groups following radical or modified radical mastectomy. This study compares the efficacy of single drug treatment (melphalan) versus multiple drug regimens (CFP and CFP + BCG). In the initial phase of the project participants in the melphalan group showed a higher recurrence rate than those in the CFP and CFP + BCG groups. The recurrence rate of the melphalan group was 4.4 times higher than the recurrence rate of the combined polychemotherapy arms. However, after the initial phase, the recurrence rates for the polychemotherapy arms steadily increased and approached the dropping rate of the melphalan group. Currently (247 weeks after the beginning of the study and nine months after the last patient accrual), 194 patients have been treated (median follow‐up time of 101 weeks), and no significant differences can be detected between the three treatment arms using any of the following criteria: disease‐free interval, proportion of recurrence and recurrence rate. The only factors which are significant with respect to recurrence are the two prognostic factors: tumor size and degree of nodal involvement. The two chemotherapy groups, CFP and CFP + BCG, show no significant difference with respect to recurrence rate along the entire span of the study.