Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.3939 on February 9 2009

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 27, No 9 (March 20), 2009: pp. 1368-1374
© 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Publisher's Note
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Watanabe, T.
Right arrow Articles by Ohashi, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Watanabe, T.
Right arrow Articles by Ohashi, Y.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Oral Uracil and Tegafur Compared With Classic Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, Fluorouracil As Postoperative Chemotherapy in Patients With Node-Negative, High-Risk Breast Cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Study for Breast Cancer 01 Trial

Toru Watanabe, Muneaki Sano, Shigemitsu Takashima, Tomoki Kitaya, Yutaka Tokuda, Masataka Yoshimoto, Norio Kohno, Kazuhiko Nakagami, Hiroji Iwata, Kojiro Shimozuma, Hiroshi Sonoo, Hitoshi Tsuda, Goi Sakamoto, Yasuo Ohashi

From the Department of Medicine, Hamamatsu Oncology Center; Atami Hospital, International University of Health and Welfare; Department of Surgery, Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka; Department of Surgery, Niigata Cancer Center Hospital, Niigata; Department of Surgery, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center Hospital, Ehime; Department of Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Kanagawa; Breast Center, Mita Hospital, International University of Health and Welfare; Department of Breast Cancer, Tokyo Medical University Hospital; Department of Breast Pathology, The Cancer Institute of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research; Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo; Department of Breast Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Aichi; Department of Health Science, Ritsumeikan University School of Engineering, Kyoto; Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, Kawasaki Medical School, Okayama; and the Department of Basic Pathology, National of Defense Medical College, Saitama.

Corresponding author: Toru Watanabe, MD, PhD, Department of Medicine, Hamamatsu Oncology Center, 3-6-13 Chuo, Naka-ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 430-0929, Japan; e-mail: twatanab{at}oncoloplan.com.

Purpose The primary aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of oral uracil-tegafur (UFT) with that of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) given as postoperative adjuvant treatment to women with node-negative, high-risk breast cancer.

Patients and Methods Women with node-negative, high-risk breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive either 2 years of UFT or six cycles of CMF after surgery. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Overall survival (OS), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL) were secondary end points. The hypothesis was that UFT was not inferior to CMF in terms of RFS.

Results Between October 1996 and April 2001, a total of 733 patients were randomly assigned to receive either treatment. The median follow-up time was 6.2 years. The RFS rates at 5 years were 88.0% in the CMF arm and 87.8% in the UFT arm. OS rates were 96.0% and 96.2%, respectively. The hazard ratios of the UFT arm relative to the CMF arm were 0.98 for RFS (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.45; P = .92) and 0.81 for OS (95% CI, 0.44 to 1.48; P = .49). The toxicity profiles differed between the two groups. The QOL scores were better for patients given UFT than those given CMF.

Conclusion RFS and OS with oral UFT were similar to those with classical CMF. Given the higher QOL scores, oral UFT is a promising alternative to CMF for postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-negative, high-risk breast cancer.

Supported by the Japan Health Sciences Foundation and by Taiho Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan. The National Surgical Adjuvant Study Group received governmental research grants from the Ministry of Health and Welfare in 1995 and 1996; and the N-SAS-BC 01 trial was financially supported by Taiho Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd.

Presented in part at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, June 12-16, 2007, Chicago, IL.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Clinical Trials repository link available on JCO.org


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
G. Francia, S. Man, C.-J. Lee, C. R. Lee, P. Xu, M. E. Mossoba, U. Emmenegger, J. A. Medin, and R. S. Kerbel
Comparative Impact of Trastuzumab and Cyclophosphamide on HER-2-Positive Human Breast Cancer Xenografts
Clin. Cancer Res., October 15, 2009; 15(20): 6358 - 6366.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Jpn J Clin OncolHome page
T. Toyama, H. Yamashita, H. Sugiura, N. Kondo, H. Iwase, and Y. Fujii
No Association Between CYP2D6*10 Genotype and Survival of Node-negative Japanese Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Tamoxifen Treatment
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2009; 39(10): 651 - 656.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online