Prognostic and Predictive Value of Centrally Reviewed Expression of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors in a Randomized Trial Comparing Letrozole and Tamoxifen Adjuvant Therapy for Postmenopausal Early Breast Cancer: BIG 1-98
Top Cited Papers
- 1 September 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 25 (25) , 3846-3852
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.11.9453
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate locally versus centrally assessed estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) receptor status and the impact of PgR on letrozole adjuvant therapy compared with tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 randomly assigned 8,010 patients to four arms comparing letrozole and tamoxifen with sequences of each agent. The Central Pathology Office received material for 6,549 patients (82%), of which 79% were assessable (6,291 patients). Prognostic and predictive value of both local and central hormone receptor expression on disease-free survival (DFS) were evaluated among 3,650 assessable patients assigned to the monotherapy arms. Prognostic value and the treatment effect were estimated for centrally assessed ER and PgR expression levels using the Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot. Results: Central review confirmed 97% of tumors as hormone receptor–positive (ER and/or PgR ≥10%). Of 105 tumors locally ER-negative, 73 were found to have more than 10% positive cells, and eight had 1% to 9%. Of 6,100 tumors locally ER positive, 66 were found to have no staining, and 54 had only 1% to 9%. Discordance was more marked for PgR than ER. Patients with tumors reclassified centrally as ER-negative, or as hormone receptor–negative, had poor DFS. Centrally assessed ER and PgR showed prognostic value. Among patients with centrally assessed ER-expressing tumors, letrozole showed better DFS than tamoxifen, irrespective of PgR expression level. Conclusion: Central review changed the assessment of receptor status in a substantial proportion of patients, and should be performed whenever possible in similar trials. PgR expression did not affect the relative efficacy of letrozole over tamoxifen.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- O-54 Switching to an aromatase inhibitor provides mortality benefit in early breast-carcinoma: Pooled analysis of 2 consecutive trialsEuropean Journal of Cancer Supplements, 2007
- Survival and safety of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2–3 years' tamoxifen treatment (Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trialThe Lancet, 2007
- Five Years of Letrozole Compared With Tamoxifen As Initial Adjuvant Therapy for Postmenopausal Women With Endocrine-Responsive Early Breast Cancer: Update of Study BIG 1-98Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007
- A Comparison of Letrozole and Tamoxifen in Postmenopausal Women with Early Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Randomized Trial of Letrozole Following Tamoxifen as Extended Adjuvant Therapy in Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: Updated Findings from NCIC CTG MA.17JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2005
- Switching of postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer to anastrozole after 2 years' adjuvant tamoxifen: combined results of ABCSG trial 8 and ARNO 95 trialThe Lancet, 2005
- Switching to Anastrozole Versus Continued Tamoxifen Treatment of Early Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results of the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2005
- A Randomized Trial of Exemestane after Two to Three Years of Tamoxifen Therapy in Postmenopausal Women with Primary Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- A Randomized Trial of Letrozole in Postmenopausal Women after Five Years of Tamoxifen Therapy for Early-Stage Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trialThe Lancet, 2002