Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy versus docetaxel and cyclophosphamide in the adjuvant treatment of HER2-negative breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Standard adjuvant chemotherapy for HER2-negative breast cancer consists generally in an anthracycline and taxane-based regimen (A+T). The TC (docetaxel and cyclophosphamide) regimen arises as a potential alternative, although individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) could not demonstrate the non-inferiority of TC over A+T. This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing 6 cycles of TC versus sequential A+T in the adjuvant treatment of HER2-negative breast cancer.

METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify RCTs comparing TC versus A+T. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Subgroup analyses of DFS according to hormone receptor status, lymph node involvement, and menopausal status were performed. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for DFS and OS were extracted from each trial, and a pooled analysis was conducted using the random-effect model. The Higgins' I-Squared Test was used to quantify heterogeneity.

RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included (12,741 patients). Overall, no difference was observed between TC and A+T in DFS (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96-1.20) and OS (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.90-1.22). A trend favoring A+T was observed in hormone receptor-negative (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.93-1.34) and N2 patients (HR 1.25; 95% CI 0.82-1.90). Emesis/vomiting, mucositis, thrombocytopenia and sensory neuropathy were significantly more frequent with A+T.

CONCLUSION: As adjuvant treatment of HER2-negative breast cancer, sequential A+T regimen was associated with increased risk of toxicities and no clear survival benefit as compared to 6 cycles of TC. Higher-risk patients may benefit the most from A+T, whilst TC may be an efficacious and less toxic alternative for lower-risk patients.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app