Purpose: In metastatic colorectal cancer, phase III studies have demonstrated the superiority of fluorouracil (FU) with leucovorin (LV) in combination with irinotecan or oxaliplatin over FU + LV alone. This phase III study investigated two sequences: folinic acid, FU, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by folinic acid, FU, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6; arm A), and FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI (arm B). Patients and Methods: Previously untreated patients with assessable disease were randomly assigned to receive a 2-hour infusion of l-LV 200 mg/m² or dl-LV 400 mg/m² followed by a FU bolus 400 mg/m² and 46-hour infusion 2,400 to 3,000 mg/m² every 46 hours every 2 weeks, either with irinotecan 180 mg/m² or with oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² as a 2-hour infusion on day 1. At progression, irinotecan was replaced by oxaliplatin (arm A), or oxaliplatin by irinotecan (arm B). Results: Median survival was 21.5 months in 109 patients allocated to FOLFIRI then FOLFOX6 versus 20.6 months in 111 patients allocated to FOLFOX6 then FOLFIRI (P = .99). Median second progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.2 months in arm A versus 10.9 in arm B (P = .64). In first-line therapy, FOLFIRI achieved 56% response rate (RR) and 8.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 54% RR and 8.0 months median PFS (P = .26). Second-line FOLFIRI achieved 4% RR and 2.5 months median PFS, versus FOLFOX6 which achieved 15% RR and 4.2 months PFS. In first-line therapy, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3/4 mucositis, nausea/vomiting, and grade 2 alopecia were more frequent with FOLFIRI, and grade 3/4 neutropenia and neurosensory toxicity were more frequent with FOLFOX6. Conclusion: Both sequences achieved a prolonged survival and similar efficacy. The toxicity profiles were different.

Trastuzumab improves survival in the adjuvant treatment of HER-positive breast cancer, although combined therapy with anthracycline-based regimens has been associated with cardiac toxicity. We wanted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new nonanthracycline regimen with trastuzumab. We randomly assigned 3222 women with HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer to receive doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 3 weeks (AC-T), the same regimen plus 52 weeks of trastuzumab (AC-T plus trastuzumab), or docetaxel and carboplatin plus 52 weeks of trastuzumab (TCH). The primary study end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points were overall survival and safety. At a median follow-up of 65 months, 656 events triggered this protocol-specified analysis. The estimated disease-free survival rates at 5 years were 75% among patients receiving AC-T, 84% among those receiving AC-T plus trastuzumab, and 81% among those receiving TCH. Estimated rates of overall survival were 87%, 92%, and 91%, respectively. No significant differences in efficacy (disease-free or overall survival) were found between the two trastuzumab regimens, whereas both were superior to AC-T. The rates of congestive heart failure and cardiac dysfunction were significantly higher in the group receiving AC-T plus trastuzumab than in the TCH group (P<0.001). Eight cases of acute leukemia were reported: seven in the groups receiving the anthracycline-based regimens and one in the TCH group subsequent to receiving an anthracycline outside the study. The addition of 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab significantly improved disease-free and overall survival among women with HER2-positive breast cancer. The risk–benefit ratio favored the nonanthracycline TCH regimen over AC-T plus trastuzumab, given its similar efficacy, fewer acute toxic effects, and lower risks of cardiotoxicity and leukemia. (Funded by Sanofi-Aventis and Genentech; BCIRG-006 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00021255.)

Histologic grade in breast cancer provides clinically important prognostic information. However, 30%-60% of tumors are classified as histologic grade 2. This grade is associated with an intermediate risk of recurrence and is thus not informative for clinical decision making. We examined whether histologic grade was associated with gene expression profiles of breast cancers and whether such profiles could be used to improve histologic grading. We analyzed microarray data from 189 invasive breast carcinomas and from three published gene expression datasets from breast carcinomas. We identified differentially expressed genes in a training set of 64 estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumor samples by comparing expression profiles between histologic grade 3 tumors and histologic grade 1 tumors and used the expression of these genes to define the gene expression grade index. Data from 597 independent tumors were used to evaluate the association between relapse-free survival and the gene expression grade index in a Kaplan-Meier analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. We identified 97 genes in our training set that were associated with histologic grade; most of these genes were involved in cell cycle regulation and proliferation. In validation datasets, the gene expression grade index was strongly associated with histologic grade 1 and 3 status; however, among histologic grade 2 tumors, the index spanned the values for histologic grade 1-3 tumors. Among patients with histologic grade 2 tumors, a high gene expression grade index was associated with a higher risk of recurrence than a low gene expression grade index (hazard ratio = 3.61, 95% confidence interval = 2.25 to 5.78; P < .001, log-rank test). Gene expression grade index appeared to reclassify patients with histologic grade 2 tumors into two groups with high versus low risks of recurrence. This approach may improve the accuracy of tumor grading and thus its prognostic value.

Background: A 70-gene signature was previously shown to have prognostic value in patients with node-negative breast cancer. Our goal was to validate the signature in an independent group of patients. Methods: Patients (n = 307, with 137 events after a median follow-up of 13.6 years) from five European centers were divided into high- and low-risk groups based on the gene signature classification and on clinical risk classifications. Patients were assigned to the gene signature low-risk group if their 5-year distant metastasis–free survival probability as estimated by the gene signature was greater than 90%. Patients were assigned to the clinicopathologic low-risk group if their 10-year survival probability, as estimated by Adjuvant! software, was greater than 88% (for estrogen receptor [ER]–positive patients) or 92% (for ER-negative patients). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated to compare time to distant metastases, disease-free survival, and overall survival in high- versus low-risk groups. Results: The 70-gene signature outperformed the clinicopathologic risk assessment in predicting all endpoints. For time to distant metastases, the gene signature yielded HR = 2.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35 to 4.00) without adjustment for clinical risk and hazard ratios ranging from 2.13 to 2.15 after adjustment for various estimates of clinical risk; clinicopathologic risk using Adjuvant! software yielded an unadjusted HR = 1.68 (95% CI = 0.92 to 3.07). For overall survival, the gene signature yielded an unadjusted HR = 2.79 (95% CI = 1.60 to 4.87) and adjusted hazard ratios ranging from 2.63 to 2.89; clinicopathologic risk yielded an unadjusted HR = 1.67 (95% CI = 0.93 to 2.98). For patients in the gene signature high-risk group, 10-year overall survival was 0.69 for patients in both the low– and high–clinical risk groups; for patients in the gene signature low-risk group, the 10-year survival rates were 0.88 and 0.89, respectively. Conclusions: The 70-gene signature adds independent prognostic information to clinicopathologic risk assessment for patients with early breast cancer.

Purpose: Recently, a 76-gene prognostic signature able to predict distant metastases in lymph node–negative (N⁻) breast cancer patients was reported. The aims of this study conducted by TRANSBIG were to independently validate these results and to compare the outcome with clinical risk assessment. Experimental Design: Gene expression profiling of frozen samples from 198 N⁻ systemically untreated patients was done at the Bordet Institute, blinded to clinical data and independent of Veridex. Genomic risk was defined by Veridex, blinded to clinical data. Survival analyses, done by an independent statistician, were done with the genomic risk and adjusted for the clinical risk, defined by Adjuvant! Online. Results: The actual 5- and 10-year time to distant metastasis were 98% (88-100%) and 94% (83-98%), respectively, for the good profile group and 76% (68-82%) and 73% (65-79%), respectively, for the poor profile group. The actual 5- and 10-year overall survival were 98% (88-100%) and 87% (73-94%), respectively, for the good profile group and 84% (77-89%) and 72% (63-78%), respectively, for the poor profile group. We observed a strong time dependence of this signature, leading to an adjusted hazard ratio of 13.58 (1.85-99.63) and 8.20 (1.10-60.90) at 5 years and 5.11 (1.57-16.67) and 2.55 (1.07-6.10) at 10 years for time to distant metastasis and overall survival, respectively. Conclusion: This independent validation confirmed the performance of the 76-gene signature and adds to the growing evidence that gene expression signatures are of clinical relevance, especially for identifying patients at high risk of early distant metastases.