Models for weighing benefits and toxicities

  • Richard D. Gelber
  • Aron Goldhirsch
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 60)

Abstract

Toxic effects of antineoplastic treatments represent a major consideration for every decision making process for both the patient and the physician. This is true for either the curative or the palliative disease settings. Palliative intent requires taking into account the side effects of treatment, especially those of a subjective nature. Outside the clinical-trial setting, use of the least toxic treatment approach to achieve a decent palliation is recommended medical practice. On the other hand, for patients who have operable disease and thus are potentially curable, reducing the incidence of relapse is the primary objective of the therapeutic approach. Lesser emphasis is placed on aspects of quality of life and subjective toxic effects of treatment. Similar considerations apply for diseases such as acute leukemias, lymphomas, and metastatic testicular cancer, in which the chances of long-term survival are almost exclusively dependent upon effective cytotoxic treatments. In diseases such as operable breast cancer, for which adjuvant cytotoxic and endocrine therapies have demonstrated a modest but statistically significant reduction in mortality [1], subjective toxic effects of treatment represent an important component in the decision making process. Much of the progress made in the treatment of this disease is attributed to the clinical trials approach in which survival, disease free survival, response rates, remission induction rate, time to progression, and incidence of toxicities are prospectively recorded as the principal endpoints.

Keywords

Placebo Toxicity Methotrexate Prednisone Alopecia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic or immune therapy: 133 randomised trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Lancet 339:1–15, 71-85, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fisher B, Costantino J, Redmond C, et al. A randomized clinical trial evaluating tamoxifen in the treatment of patients with node-negative breast cancer who have estrogen-receptor-positive tumors. N Engl J Med 320:479–484, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goldhirsch A, for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer: Part 1 — A randomized trial of chemoendocrine versus endocrine therapy versus mastectomy alone. In: Adjuvant Therapy of Cancer IV, SE Jones and SE Salmon (eds). Grune & Stratton, Orlando, FL, 1984, pp. 379–391.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fisher B, Rockette H, Fisher ER, et al. Leukemia in breast cancer patients following adjuvant chemotherapy or postoperative radiation: The NSABP experience. J Clin Oncol 3:1640–1658, 1985.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Valagussa P, Tancini G, and Bonadonna G. Second malignancies after CMF for resectable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 5:1138–1142, 1987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fornander T, Rutqvist LE, Cedermark B, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen in early breast cancer: Occurrence of new primary cancers. Lancet 1:117–120, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maguire P, Selby P, on behalf of the Medical Research Council’s Cancer Therapy Committee Working Party on Quality of Life. Assessing quality of life in cancer patients. Br J Cancer 60:437–440, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moinpour CM, Feigl P, Metch B, et al. Quality of life end points in cancer clinical trials: Review and recommendations. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:485–495, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brunner KW, Sonntag RW, Martz G, et al. Controlled study in the use of combined drug therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 36:1208–1219, 1975.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coates A, Gebski V, Bishop JF, et al. Improving the quality of life during chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: A comparison of intermittent and continuous treatment strategies. N Engl J Med 317:1490–1495, 1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Castiglione M. SAKK protocol 24/85 for advanced breast cancer, personal communication.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Levine MN, Guyatt GH, Gent M, et al. Quality of life in stage II breast cancer: An instrument for clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 6:1798–1810, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Castiglione M, for the International Breast Cancer Study Group. The duration of a life of quality should become the focus of ‘quality-of-life’ studies (letter). J Clin Oncol 7:542–543, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gelber RD and Goldhirsch A. A new endpoint for assessment of adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 4:1772–1779, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Castiglione M, Isley M, Price K, Coates A, for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Time without symptoms and toxicity (TWiST): A quality-of-life-oriented endpoint. In: Adjuvant Therapy of Cancer V, SE Salmon (ed). Grune & Stratton, Orlando, FL, 1987, pp. 455–465.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Coates A, Fischer Dillenbeck C, McNeil DR, et al. On the receiving end-II. Linear analogue self-assessment (LASA) in evaluation of aspects of the quality of life of cancer patients receiving therapy. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 19:1633–1637, 1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Simes RJ, Glasziou P, Coates AS, for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Costs and benefits of adjuvant therapy in breast cancer: A quality-adjusted survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 7:36–44, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Castiglione M, for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Relapse of breast cancer after adjuvant treatment in premenopausal and perimenopausal women: Patterns and prognoses. J Clin Oncol 6:89–97, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gelber RD, Gelman RS, and Goldhirsch A. A quality-of-life-oriented end point for comparing therapies. Biometrics 45:781–795, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer: The Ludwig Breast Cancer Trials 1987. In: Adjuvant Therapy of Cancer V, SE Salmon (ed). Grune & Stratton, Orlando, FL, 1987, pp. 297–309.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hürny C, Bernhard J, Gelber RD, Coates A, Castiglione M, Isley M, Dreher D, Peterson H, Goldhirsch A, Senn H-J. Quality of life measures for patients receiving adjuvant therapy for breast cancer: an international trial. Eur J Cancer 28:118–124, 1992.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard D. Gelber
  • Aron Goldhirsch

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations