NSABP Members' Area
  Password Protected - Access
  Limited to NSABP Participating
  Institutions Only

NSABP Foundation, Inc.

General NSABP Information
  Financial Conflicts of
     Interest Policy
  Coalition Comment:
  IOM Report Group Comment
  Contact the NSABP
  Pathology Section
  Future Meetings
  NSABP Newsletters
  Media Info on STAR

Clinical Trials Information
  Clinical Trials Overview
  Protocol Chart
  Never Say Lost

Treatment Trials Information
  Protocol B-51
  Protocol B-52
  Protocol B-53/S1207
  Protocol B-55/BIG 6-13

Prevention Trials Information
  Protocol P-1 - BCPT
  Protocol P-2 - STAR

Scientific Publications

Related Web Sites

Medical Search Engines

To report problems, ask
questions or make comments,
please send e-mail to:

Annotated Bibliography of NSABP Publications

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer
Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Brown A, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Begovic M, DeCillis A, Robidoux A, Margolese RG, Cruz AB Jr, Hoehn JL, Lees AW, Dimitrov NV, Bear HD
Journal of Clinical Oncology 16(8):2672-2685, 1998

Purpose: To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies.

Patients and Methods: Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response.

Results: There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P=.99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P=.23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model.

Conclusions: Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.

National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, Pittsburgh, PA.