Skip to main content
Log in

Premenopausal Breast Cancer

Chemotherapy and Endocrine Therapy

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modern treatment of premenopausal breast cancer is based on well-established prognostic and predictive factors for disease outcome such as nodal status, hormone receptor expression, tumour size, tumour grading and patient age. The development of strategies according to such individual risk profiles has resulted in significant improvements both in overall and disease-free survival. An abundant number of new prognostic and predictive factors in addition to those already mentioned may help to increase our understanding of the biology of breast cancer and to individualise therapy in premenopausal patients. Although less than 10% of patients directly benefit, it is estimated that approximately each year the life of more than 4000 women in Germany will be saved or prolonged by adjuvant treatment. Whether dose intensive modifications and new antineoplastic drugs can improve disease outcome will be clarified when ongoing studies have increased observation time.

At present, hormone ablation via surgical, radiotherapeutical or drug-induced castration in addition to selective estrogen response modifiers (SERM), such as tamoxifen, with or without chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with breast cancer. In advanced disease, new highly effective hormonal and other target-oriented antineoplastic agents with few adverse effects have been recently introduced. However, overall survival in metastatic disease remains poor, even when intensive or high-dose chemotherapy is used. Special attention must be given to longer follow up and potential toxic long-term adverse effects of therapy when new regimens are applied in clinical trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Fig. 1
Table III
Table IV
Table V
Table VI
Table VII

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parkin DM, Pisani P, Ferlay J. Estimates of the world wide incidence of 25 major cancers in 1990. Int J Cancer 1999; 80: 827–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Szabo Cl, King MC. Inherited breast and ovarian cancer. Hum Mol Genet 1995; 4: 1811–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shiloh Y. Ataxia-telangiectasia, ATM, and genomic stability: maintaining a delicate balance. Two international workshops on ataxia-telangiectasia, related disorders, and the ATM protein. Biochem Biophys Acta 1998; 1378: Rl 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: Report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Projekt P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1371–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Powles T, Eeles R, Ashley S, et al. Interim analysis of the incidence of breast cancer in the Royal Marsden Hospital tamoxifen randomised chemoprevention trial. Lancet 1998; 352: 98–101

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Veronesi U, Maisonneuve P, Costa A, et al. Prevention of breast cancer with tamoxifen: preliminary findings from the Italian randomised trial among hysterectomised women. Lancet 1998; 352: 93–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Valero V, Buzdar A, Hortobagyi G. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Oncologist 1996; 1: 8–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Palangie T, Mossed V, Mihura J, et al. Prognostic factors in inflammatory breast cancer and therapeutic implications. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A(7): 921–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Booser DJ, et al. Combined modality treatment of stage III and inflammatory breast cancer. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1995; 4(4): 715–34

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Adkins D, Brown K, Trinkaus R, et al. Outcomes of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation in Stage IIIB inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 2006–14

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy of the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2672–85

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mustacchi G, Latteier J, Milani S, et al. Tamoxifen versus surgery with tamoxifen as primary treatment for elderly patients with breast cancer: Combined data from the ‘GREATA’ and ‘CRC’ trials [abstract]. Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 1998. Available from URL: http://www.asco.org [Accessed 2002 Sep 17]

  13. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 1998; 351: 1451–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. National Institutes of Health Consensus Statements: Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer [online]. Available from URL: http://consensus.nih.gov [Accessed 2000 Nov 1–3]

  15. Pritchard K. Best types of endocrine treatments [abstract]. The Breast 2001; 10 Suppl. 1:S9

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fisher B, Digman J, Wolmark N, et al. Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1999; 353: 1993–2000

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Howell A, Downey S, Anderson E, et al. New endocrine therapies for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A(4): 576–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Osborne K, Zhao H, Fuqua SA, et al. Selective estrogen receptor modulators: structure, function, and clinical use. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3172–86

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Davidson N, O’Neill A, Vukov A, et al. Effect of chemohormonal therapy in premenopausal, node (+), receptor (+) breast cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Phase III Intergroup trial (E5188, INT-0101) [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 67a

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jakesz R, Hausmaninger H, Samonigg H, et al. Comparison of adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen and goserelin vs. CMF in premenopausal stage I and II hormone-responsive breast cancer patients: four year results of Austrian Breast Cancer Study group(ABCSG) Trail 5 [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 67a

    Google Scholar 

  21. Boccardo F, Rubagotti A, Amoroso D, et al. for the Italian Breast Cancer Adjuvant Study Group. Cyclophosphamide, Methotrexate, and Fluorouracil versus Tamoxifen plus Ovarian Suppression as adjuvant Treatment of Estrogen Receptor-Positive Pre-/Perimenopausal Breast Cancer Patients: Results of the Italian Breast Cancer Adjuvant Study Group 02 Randomized Trial. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2718–27

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Jonat W on Behalf of the Zebra (Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association) Trialist’s Group. Zoladex (Goserelin) vs CMF as adjuvant therapy in pre/ perimenopausal early (node positive) breast cancer: Preliminary efficacy, QOL and BMD results from the ZEBRA study. [abstract] Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 64: 13

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dowsett M, Stein RC, Coombes RC. Aromatization inhibition alone or in combination with GnRH agonists for the treatment of premenopausal breast cancer patients. J Steriod Biochem Mol Biol 1992; 43: 155–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, et al. Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the Treatment of Primary Breast Cancer. Seventh International Conference on Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001 Sep 15; 19(18): 3817–27

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’Collaborative Group. Poly-chemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 1998; 352: 930–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fisher B, Jeong JH, Dignam J, et al. Findings from recent national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project adjuvant studies in stage I breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2001; (30): 62–6

  27. Goldhirsch A, Coates AS, Colleoni M, et al. Adjuvant chemoendokrine therapy in postmenopausal breast cancer: Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil dose and schedule may make a difference. International Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 1358–62

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Rivkin SE, Green S, Lew D, et al. Adjuvant CMFVP versus Melphalan for operable breast cancer with positive axillary nodes: 23 year results of a Southwest Oncology group study [Abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 69a

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mansour EG, Gray R, Shatila AH, et al. Survival advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy in high risk node.-negative breast cancer: ten years analysis — an intergroup study. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3486–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Moliterni A, et al. Adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in node positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 901–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hutchins L, Green S, Ravidin P, et al. CMF versus CAF with or without tamoxifen in high risk node negative breast cancer patients and a natural history of follow up study in node negative patients: first results of intergroup trial INT 0102. [abstract] Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17: la

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher B, Brown AM, Dimitrov NV, et al. Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: Results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-15 [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1483–96

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Levine MN, Bramvell VH, Pritchard KI. Randomized trial of intensive cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and fluorouracil chemotherapy compared with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil on premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer. National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2651–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Mouridsen T, Andersen J, Anderson N, et al. Adjuvant anthra-cycline in breast cancer. Improved outcome in premenopausal patients following substitution of methotrexate in the CMF combination with epirubicin [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999, 18: 68a

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gianni L, Zambetti M, Moliterni A. Cardiac sequelae in operable breast cancer patients after CMF ± doxorubicin (A) ± irradiation [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 68a

    Google Scholar 

  36. Budmann DR, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al. Dose and dose-intensity as determinants of outcome in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. The cancer and leukemia Group B. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1205–11

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fumoleau P, Bremond A, Kerbrat P, et al. Better outcome of premenopausal node positive breast cancer patients treated with six cycles vs. three cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy: Eight year follow up results of FASG01 [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 252

    Google Scholar 

  38. Henderson IC, Berry D, Demetri G, et al. Improved disease-free and overall survival from the addition of sequential paclitaxel but not from the escalation of doxorubicin dose level in the adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with node-positive primary breast cancer [abstract no. 390A]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1998; 17: 101a

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hudis C, Seidman A, Baselga J, et al. Sequential dose-dense doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and cyclophosphamide for resectable high-risk breast cancer: feasibility and efficacy. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 93–100

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Rodenhuis S, Bonenbal M, Beex LVAM, et al. Randomized phase III study of high-dose chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin in operable breast cancer with 4 or more axillary lymph nodes [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2000; 19: 286

    Google Scholar 

  41. Peters W, Rosner G, Vredenburgh J, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of two doses of combination alkyating agents (AA) as consolidation after CAF in high-risk primary breast cancer involving ten or more axillary lymph nodes (LN): preliminary results of CALGB 9082/SWOG 9114/ NCIC MA-13 [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 2

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU, Theriault RL, et al. Randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy and blood cell autografts for high-risk primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 225–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Bergh J. Results from a randomized adjuvant breast cancer study with high dose chemotherapy with CTCb supported by autologous bone marrow stem cells versus dose escalated and tailored FEC Therapy (The Scandinavian breast Cancer Study Group 9401) [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 3

    Google Scholar 

  44. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, et al. Human breast cancer: Correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 1987; 235: 177–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Thor AD, Berry DA, Budman DR, et al. ErbB-2, p53, and efficacy of adjuvant therapy in lymph node-positive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1346–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Bianco AR, De Laurentiis M, Carlomango C, et al. HER2 over-expression predicts adjuvant tamoxifen failure for early breast cancer: Complete data at 20 years of the naples gun randomised trial. [abstract] Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2000; 19: 289

    Google Scholar 

  47. Saez RA, Osborne CK. Hormonal treatment of advanced breast cancer. In: Kennedy BJ, editor. Breast cancer. Vol 1 of current clinical oncology. New York (NY): Alan RLiss, 1989: 163–172

    Google Scholar 

  48. Santen RJ, Manni A, Harvey H, et al. Endocrine treatment of breast cancer in women. Endocr Rev 1990 May; 11(2): 221–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Klijn JGM. LH-RH agonists in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer: ten years’ experience. Recent Results Cancer Res 1992; 124: 75–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Klijn JGM, Louk VA, Beex AM, et al. for the EORTC-Breast Cancer Cooperativ. Combined treatment with buserelin and tamoxifen in premenopausal metastatic breast cancer: a randomised study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92(11): 903–11

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Klijn JGM, Blarney R, Boccarado F, et al. for the Combined Hormone Agents Trialists’ Group and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Combined Tamoxifen and Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone (LHRH) Agonist versus LHRH Agonist alone in premenopausal advanced breast cancer: A meta-analysis of four randomised trials. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 343–53

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Dowsett M, Doody D, Miall S, et al. Vorozole results in greater oestrogen suppression than formestane in postmenopausal women and when added to goserelin in premenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1999; 56: 25–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Celio L, Martinetti A, Ferrari L, et al. Premenopausal breast cancer patients treated with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog alone or in combination with an aromatase inhibitor: a comparative endocrine study. Anticancer Res 1999; 19: 2261–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Stein RC, Dowsett M, Hedley A, et al. The clinical and endocrine effects of 4-hydroxyandrostenedione alone and in combination with goserelin in premenopausal women with advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1990; 62: 679–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Lonning PE, Lien E. Mechanisms of action of endocrine treatment in breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1995; 21: 158–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Dombernowsky, P; Smith I, Falkson G, et al. Letrozole, a new oral aromatase inhibitor for advanced breast cancer: double-blind randomized trial showing a dose effect and improved efficacy and tolerability compared with megestrol acetate. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 453–61

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Buzdar AU, Jonat W, Howell A, et al. Anastrozole versus megestrol acetate in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast carcinoma: results of a survival update based on a combined analysis of data from two mature phase III trials. Cancer 1998; 83(69): 1142–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Mouridsen HT, Gershanovich M, Monnier A, et al. Letrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line hormonal treatment of post-menopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (bc) [presented at the European Breast Cancer Conference 2000, abstract no. 489]. Ann Oncol 2000; 11 Suppl. 4: 155

    Google Scholar 

  59. Nabholtz JM, Budzar A, Pollak M, et al. for the Arimidex Study Group. Anastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: Results of a north American multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3758–67

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Bonneterre J, Thürlimann B, Robertson JFR, et al. for the Arimidex Study Group. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in 668 postmenopausal women: Results of the tamoxifen or arimidex randomized group efficacy and tolerability study. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3748–57

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Kaufmann M, Bajetta E, Dirix LY, et al. Exemestane is superior to megestrol acetate after tamoxifen failure in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer: results of a phase III randomized double-blind trial. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1399–411

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Lonning E, Bajetta E, Murray R, et al. Activity of exemestane in metastatic breast cancer after failure of nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2234–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Sledge GW, Hu P, Falkson G, et al. for the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Comparison of chemotherapy with chemohormonal therapy as first-line therapy for metastatic, hormone-sensitive breast cancer: An eastern cooperative oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 262–6

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. A’Hern RP, Smith IE, Ebbs SR. Chemotherapy and survival in advanced breast cancer: the inclusion of doxorubicin in Cooper type regimens. Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 801–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Verwei J, Clavel M, Chevalier P. Paclitaxel (taxol) and docetaxel (taxotere): not simply two of a kind. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 495–505

    Google Scholar 

  66. Hortobagyi GN. Treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 974–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Johnson SA, Harper P. Hortobagyi GN, et al. Vinorelbine: an overview. Cancer Treat Rev 1996; 22: 127–42

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Antman KH, Rowlings PA, Vaughan WP, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoetic stem cell support forbreastcancerinNorth America. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1870–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Sayer HG, Vogt T, Hoffmann K, et al. High response-rate of short duration with a double high-dose-chemotherapy regimen of doxorubicin/paclitaxel/cyclophos-phamide/thiotepa [ATCT] and peripheral blood progenitor cell support in patients with metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. Bone Marrow Transplant 2000; 26 Suppl. 1: S34

    Google Scholar 

  70. Falkson G, Gelman RS, Pandya KJ, et al. Eastern cooperative oncology Group randomized trials of observation versus maintenance therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer in complete remission following induction treatment. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 1669–76

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Geels P, Eisenhauer E, Bezjak A, et al. Palliative effect of chemotherapy: objective tumor response is associated with symptom improvement in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2395–405

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Cobleigh MA, Vogel CL, Tripathy D, et al. Multinational study of the efficacy and safety of humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody in women who have HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after chemotherapy for metastatic disease. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 2639–48

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Norton L, Slamon D, Leyland-Jones B, et al. Overall survival (OS) advantage to simultaneous chemotherapy (CRx) plus the humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody herceptin (H) in HER2-overexpressing (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1999; 18: 127a

    Google Scholar 

  74. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Lipton A, et al. Long-term prevention of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate. Protocol-19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2038–44

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Diel IJ, Solomayer EF, Costa AD, et al. Reduction in new metastases in breast cancer with adjuvant clodronate treatment. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 357–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Powles TJ, McCloskey E, Paterson AH, et al. Oral clondronate and reduction of loss in bone mineral density in women with operable primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 704–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Hillner BE, Ingle JN, Berenson JR, et al. for the American Society of Clinical Oncology Bisphosphonates Expert Panel. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1378–91

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This manuscript was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Herbert G. Sayer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sayer, H.G., Kath, R., Kliche, KO. et al. Premenopausal Breast Cancer. Drugs 62, 2025–2038 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200262140-00003

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200262140-00003

Keywords

Navigation