Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Correlation between progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving anthracyclines, taxanes, or targeted therapies: a trial-level meta-analysis

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the past decade, several new drugs have received regulatory approval for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, some of these approvals were based on improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), without a concomitant increase in overall survival (OS). This has led some to question the utility of using PFS as a measure for drug approval. To address the uncertainty of using PFS as a surrogate for OS in MBC, a systematic literature review followed by a trial-level correlative analysis was conducted in patients receiving anthracyclines, taxanes, or targeted therapies. Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized trials published between January 1990 and August 2015. Data extraction included hazard ratios for PFS (HRPFS) and OS (HROS) between comparative arms as well as trial-level parameters. Weighted multivariate regression analysis was then used to test the strength of the association between HRPFS and HROS. 72 trials providing 84 comparative arms met the inclusion criteria. HRPFS was a significant predictor of HROS (model coefficient = 0.18, p = 0.04). However, only 31 % (i.e., model R 2) of the variability between the PFS–OS association was accounted for. When trials were limited to ≥2nd-line setting, the strength of the association improved (model coefficient = 0.40, p < 0.001) and the model R 2 increased to 55 %. However, the HRPFS–HROS association was no longer significant when only 1st-line trials were considered (p = 0.90). HRPFS is a predictor for HROS in MBC randomized trials. However, the effect was driven by trials in the ≥2nd-line setting. Therefore, PFS can be a suitable surrogate for OS in trials evaluating new treatments in the 2nd setting and beyond. The use of PFS alone as a primary trial endpoint in the 1st-line setting is not recommended.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baselga J, Cortés J, Kim S et al (2012) Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 366:109–119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pierga JY, Delva R, Pivot X et al (2014) Bevacizumab and taxanes in the first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer: overall survival and subgroup analyses of the ATHENA study in France. Bull Cancer 101:780–788

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dranitsaris G, Papadopoulos G (2014) Health Technology Assessment of Cancer Drugs in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia: Should the United States Take Notice? Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, pp 1–12

  4. Lowes R (2011) Avastin no longer approved for breast cancer, FDA says. Medscape Web site. Avastin no longer approved for breast cancer, FDA says. Medscape Web site

  5. Fojo T, Grady C (2009) How much is life worth: cetuximab, non-small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:1044–1048

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hillner BE, Smith TJ (2009) Efficacy does not necessarily translate to cost effectiveness: a case study in the challenges associated with 21st-century cancer drug pricing. J Clin Oncol 27:2111–2113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ellis LM, Bernstein DS, Voest EE et al (2014) American Society of Clinical Oncology perspective: raising the bar for clinical trials by defining clinically meaningful outcomes. J Clin Oncol 32:1277–1280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Amir E, Seruga B, Kwong R et al (2012) Poor correlation between progression-free and overall survival in modern clinical trials: are composite endpoints the answer? Eur J Cancer 48:385–388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Broglio KR, Berry DA (2009) Detecting an overall survival benefit that is derived from progression-free survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:1642–1649

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Saad ED, Katz A, Hoff PM et al (2010) Progression-free survival as surrogate and as true end point: insights from the breast and colorectal cancer literature. Ann Oncol 21:7–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fleming TR, Rothmann MD, Lu HL (2009) Issues in using progression-free survival when evaluating oncology products. J Clin Oncol 27:2874–2880

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhuang SH, Xiu L, Elsayed YA (2009) Overall survival: a gold standard in search of a surrogate: the value of progression-free survival and time to progression as end points of drug efficacy. Cancer J 15:395–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilkerson J, Fojo T (2009) Progression-free survival is simply a measure of a drug’s effect while administered and is not a surrogate for overall survival. Cancer J 15:379–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tang PA, Bentzen SM, Chen EX et al (2007) Surrogate end points for median overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: literature-based analysis from 39 randomized controlled trials of first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 25:4562–4568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Buyse M, Burzykowski T, Carroll K et al (2007) Progression-free survival is a surrogate for survival in advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:5218–5224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shi Q, Sargent DJ (2009) Meta-analysis for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials. Int J Clin Oncol 14:102–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shi Q, de Gramont A, Grothey A et al (2015) Individual patient data analysis of progression-free survival versus overall survival as a first-line end point for metastatic colorectal cancer in modern randomized trials: findings from the analysis and research in cancers of the digestive system database. J Clin Oncol 33:22–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Burzykowski T, Buyse M, Piccart-Gebhart MJ et al (2008) Evaluation of tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival, and time to progression as potential surrogate end points in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:1987–1992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Miksad RA, Zietemann V, Gothe R et al (2008) Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint in advanced breast cancer. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 24:371–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wong SS, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB (2006) Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound treatment studies in EMBASE. J Med Libr Assoc 94(1):41–47

  22. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR, Hedges Team (2005) Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from medline: analytical survey. BMJ 330(7501):1179

Download references

Funding

This study was not supported by external funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA

    George Adunlin & John W. W. Cyrus

  2. Augmentium Pharma Consulting Inc., 283 Danforth Ave, Suite 448, Toronto, M4K 1N2, Canada

    George Dranitsaris

Authors
  1. George Adunlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John W. W. Cyrus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Dranitsaris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Dranitsaris.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Appendix: List of studies included in the meta-analysis

Appendix: List of studies included in the meta-analysis

  1. 1.

    Ackland SP, Anton A, Breitbach GP et al. (2001) Dose-intensive epirubicin-based chemotherapy is superior to an intensive intravenous cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil regimen in metastatic breast cancer: a randomized multinational study. J Clin Oncol 19:943–953.

  2. 2.

    Albain KS, Nag SM, Calderillo-Ruiz G et al. (2008) Gemcitabine plus Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline treatment. J Clin Oncol 26:3950–3957.

  3. 3.

    André F, O’Regan R, Ozguroglu M et al. (2014) Everolimus for women with trastuzumab-resistant, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. The lancet oncology 15:580–591.

  4. 4.

    Baselga J, Campone M, Piccart M et al. (2012) Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 366:520–529.

  5. 5.

    Baselga J, Cortés J, Kim S et al. (2012) Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med 366:109–119.

  6. 6.

    Bastholt L, Dalmark M, Gjedde SB et al. (1996) Dose–response relationship of epirubicin in the treatment of postmenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer: a randomized study of epirubicin at four different dose levels performed by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 14:1146–1155.

  7. 7.

    Batist G, Ramakrishnan G, Rao CS et al. (2001) Reduced cardiotoxicity and preserved antitumor efficacy of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in a randomized, multicenter trial of metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:1444–1454.

  8. 8.

    Biganzoli L, Cufer T, Bruning P et al. (2002) Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10961 Multicenter Phase III Trial. J Clin Oncol 20:3114–3121.

  9. 9.

    Bishop JF, Dewar J, Toner GC et al. (1999) Initial paclitaxel improves outcome compared with CMFP combination chemotherapy as front-line therapy in untreated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:2355–2364.

  10. 10.

    Blackwell KL, Burstein HJ, Storniolo AM et al. (2010) Randomized study of Lapatinib alone or in combination with trastuzumab in women with ErbB2-positive, trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:1124–1130.

  11. 11.

    Blajman C, Balbiani L, Block J et al. (1999) A prospective, randomized phase III trial comparing combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5‐fluorouracil with vinorelbine plus doxorubicin in the treatment of advanced breast carcinoma. Cancer 85:1091–1097.

  12. 12.

    Blomqvist C, Elomaa I, Rissanen P et al. (1993) Influence of treatment schedule on toxicity and efficacy of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil in metastatic breast cancer: a randomized trial comparing weekly and every-4-week administration. J Clin Oncol 11:467–473.

  13. 13.

    Bonneterre J, Roche H, Monnier A et al. (2002) Docetaxel vs 5-fluorouracil plus vinorelbine in metastatic breast cancer after anthracycline therapy failure. Br J Cancer 87:1210–1215.

  14. 14.

    Bontenbal M, Andersson M, Wildiers J et al. (1998) Doxorubicin vs epirubicin, report of a second-line randomized phase II/III study in advanced breast cancer. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Br J Cancer 77:2257–2263.

  15. 15.

    Bontenbal M, Creemers GJ, Braun HJ et al. (2005) Phase II to III study comparing doxorubicin and docetaxel with fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: results of a Dutch Community Setting Trial for the Clinical Trial Group of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre. J Clin Oncol 23:7081–7088.

  16. 16.

    Brufman G, Colajori E, Ghilezan N et al. (1997) Doubling epirubicin dose intensity (100 mg/m2 versus 50 mg/m2) in the FEC regimen significantly increases response rates. An international randomised phase III study in metastatic breast cancer. The Epirubicin High Dose (HEPI 010) Study Group. Ann Oncol 8:155–162.

  17. 17.

    Cameron D, Casey M, Press M et al. (2008) A phase III randomized comparison of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on trastuzumab: updated efficacy and biomarker analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 112:533–543.

  18. 18.

    Cassier PA, Chabaud S, Trillet-Lenoir V et al. (2008) A phase-III trial of doxorubicin and docetaxel versus doxorubicin and paclitaxel in metastatic breast cancer: results of the ERASME 3 study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109:343–350.

  19. 19.

    Chan S, Davidson N, Juozaityte E et al. (2004) Phase III trial of liposomal doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with epirubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 15:1527–1534.

  20. 20.

    Chan S, Friedrichs K, Noel D et al. (1999) Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus doxorubicin in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:2341–2354.

  21. 21.

    Chan S, Romieu G, Huober J et al. (2009) Phase III study of gemcitabine plus docetaxel compared with capecitabine plus docetaxel for anthracycline-pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:1753–1760.

  22. 22.

    Conte PF, Guarneri V, Bruzzi P et al. (2004) Concomitant versus sequential administration of epirubicin and paclitaxel as first‐line therapy in metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer 101:704–712.

  23. 23.

    Cowan JD, Neidhart J, McClure S et al. (1991) Randomized trial of doxorubicin, bisantrene, and mitoxantrone in advanced breast cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Natl Cancer Inst 83:1077–1084.

  24. 24.

    Del Mastro L, Venturini M, Lionetto R et al. (2001) Accelerated-intensified cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) compared with standard CEF in metastatic breast cancer patients: results of a multicenter, randomized phase III study of the Italian Gruppo Oncologico Nord-Ouest-Mammella Inter Gruppo Group. J Clin Oncol 19:2213–2221.

  25. 25.

    Di Leo A, Gomez HL, Aziz Z et al. (2008) Phase III, double-blind, randomized study comparing lapatinib plus paclitaxel with placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:5544–5552.

  26. 26.

    Ejlertsen B, Mouridsen HT, Langkjer ST et al. (2004) Phase III study of intravenous vinorelbine in combination with epirubicin versus epirubicin alone in patients with advanced breast cancer: a Scandinavian Breast Group Trial (SBG9403). J Clin Oncol 22:2313–2320.

  27. 27.

    Esteban E, Lacave A, Fernandez J et al. (1999) Phase III trial of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, fluorouracil (CEF) versus cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone, fluorouracil (CNF) in women with metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 58:141–150.

  28. 28.

    Feher O, Vodvarka P, Jassem J et al. (2005) First-line gemcitabine versus epirubicin in postmenopausal women aged 60 or older with metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter, randomized, phase III study. Ann Oncol 16:899–908.

  29. 29.

    Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I et al. (2015) The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study. The Lancet Oncology 16:25–35.

  30. 30.

    Fountzilas G, Dafni U, Dimopoulos M et al. (2009) A randomized phase III study comparing three anthracycline-free taxane-based regimens, as first line chemotherapy, in metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 115:87–99.

  31. 31.

    Fountzilas G, Kalofonos HP, Dafni U et al. (2004) Paclitaxel and epirubicin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer: a phase III study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group. Ann Oncol 15:1517–1526.

  32. 32.

    Fountzilas G, Papadimitriou C, Dafni U et al. (2001) Dose-dense sequential chemotherapy with epirubicin and paclitaxel versus the combination, as first-line chemotherapy, in advanced breast cancer: a randomized study conducted by the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 19:2232–2239.

  33. 33.

    French Epirubicin Study Group (2000) Epirubicin-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients: role of dose-intensity and duration of treatment. J Clin Oncol 18:3115–3124.

  34. 34.

    Gradishar WJ, Krasnojon D, Cheporov S et al. (2009) Significantly longer progression-free survival with nab-paclitaxel compared with docetaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:3611–3619.

  35. 35.

    Gray R, Bhattacharya S, Bowden C et al. (2009) Independent review of E2100: a phase III trial of bevacizumab plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:4966–4972.

  36. 36.

    Harris L, Batist G, Belt R et al. (2002) Liposome‐encapsulated doxorubicin compared with conventional doxorubicin in a randomized multicenter trial as first‐line therapy of metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer 94:25–36.

  37. 37.

    Harvey V, Mouridsen H, Semiglazov V et al. (2006) Phase III trial comparing three doses of docetaxel for second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:4963–4970.

  38. 38.

    Hausmaninger H, Lehnert M, Steger G et al. (1995) Randomised phase II study of epirubicin-vindesine versus mitoxantrone-vindesine in metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 31:2169–2173.

  39. 39.

    Heidemann E, Stoeger H, Souchon R et al. (2002) Is first-line single-agent mitoxantrone in the treatment of high-risk metastatic breast cancer patients as effective as combination chemotherapy? No difference in survival but higher quality of life were found in a multicenter randomized trial. Ann Oncol 13:1717–1729.

  40. 40.

    Hurvitz SA, Andre F, Jiang Z et al. (2015) Combination of everolimus with trastuzumab plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-1): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial. The Lancet Oncology 16:816–829.

  41. 41.

    Icli F, Akbulut H, Uner A et al. (2005) Cisplatin plus oral etoposide (EoP) combination is more effective than paclitaxel in patients with advanced breast cancer pretreated with anthracyclines: a randomised phase III trial of Turkish Oncology Group. Br J Cancer 92:639–644.

  42. 42.

    Jassem J, Pienkowski T, Pluzanska A et al. (2001) Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer: final results of a randomized phase III multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 19:1707–1715.

  43. 43.

    Joensuu H, Holli K, Heikkinen M et al. (1998) Combination chemotherapy versus single-agent therapy as first- and second-line treatment in metastatic breast cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 16:3720–3730.

  44. 44.

    Kaufman B, Mackey JR, Clemens MR et al. (2009) Trastuzumab plus anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study. J Clin Oncol 27:5529–5537.

  45. 45.

    Keller AM, Mennel RG, Georgoulias VA et al. (2004) Randomized phase III trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus vinorelbine or mitomycin C plus vinblastine in women with taxane-refractory advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:3893–3901.

  46. 46.

    Krop IE, Kim S, González-Martín A et al. (2014) Trastuzumab emtansine versus treatment of physician’s choice for pretreated HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (TH3RESA): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology 15:689–699.

  47. 47.

    Langley RE, Carmichael J, Jones AL et al. (2005) Phase III trial of epirubicin plus paclitaxel compared with epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute trial AB01. J Clin Oncol 23:8322–8330.

  48. 48.

    Marty M, Cognetti F, Maraninchi D et al. (2005) Randomized phase II trial of the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab combined with docetaxel in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer administered as first-line treatment: the M77001 study group. J Clin Oncol 23:4265–4274.

  49. 49.

    Mavroudis D, Papakotoulas P, Ardavanis A et al. (2010) Randomized phase III trial comparing docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol 21:48–54.

  50. 50.

    Miller KD, Chap LI, Holmes FA et al. (2005) Randomized phase III trial of capecitabine compared with bevacizumab plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:792–799.

  51. 51.

    Nabholtz JM, Falkson C, Campos D et al. (2003) Docetaxel and doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: results of a randomized, multicenter, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 21:968–975.

  52. 52.

    Nabholtz JM, Senn HJ, Bezwoda WR et al. (1999) Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus mitomycin plus vinblastine in patients with metastatic breast cancer progressing despite previous anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. 304 Study Group. J Clin Oncol 17:1413–1424.

  53. 53.

    Namer M, Soler-Michel P, Turpin F et al. (2001) Results of a phase III prospective, randomised trial, comparing mitoxantrone and vinorelbine (MV) in combination with standard FAC/FEC in front-line therapy of metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 37:1132–1140.

  54. 54.

    Norris B, Pritchard KI, James K et al. (2000) Phase III comparative study of vinorelbine combined with doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone in disseminated metastatic/recurrent breast cancer: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study MA8. J Clin Oncol 18:2385–2394.

  55. 55.

    O’Brien ME, Wigler N, Inbar M et al. (2004) Reduced cardiotoxicity and comparable efficacy in a phase III trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin HCl (CAELYX/Doxil) versus conventional doxorubicin for first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 15:440–449.

  56. 56.

    O’Shaughnessy J, Miles D, Vukelja S et al. (2002) Superior survival with capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer: phase III trial results. J Clin Oncol 20:2812–2823.

  57. 57.

    Paridaens R, Biganzoli L, Bruning P et al. (2000) Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over. J Clin Oncol 18:724–733.

  58. 58.

    Parnes HL, Cirrincione C, Aisner J et al. (2003) Phase III study of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil (CAF) plus leucovorin versus CAF for metastatic breast cancer: Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9140. J Clin Oncol 21:1819–1824.

  59. 59.

    Piccart M, Hortobagyi GN, Campone M et al. (2014) Everolimus plus exemestane for hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative advanced breast cancer: overall survival results from BOLERO-2dagger. Ann Oncol 25:2357–2362.

  60. 60.

    Robert N, Leyland-Jones B, Asmar L et al. (2006) Randomized phase III study of trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin compared with trastuzumab and paclitaxel in women with HER-2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:2786–2792.

  61. 61.

    Sjöström J, Blomqvist C, Mouridsen H et al. (1999) Docetaxel compared with sequential methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced breast cancer after anthracycline failure: a randomised phase III study with crossover on progression by the Scandinavian Breast Group. Eur J Cancer 35:1194–1201.

  62. 62.

    Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S et al. (2001) Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 344:783–792.

  63. 63.

    Sledge GW, Neuberg D, Bernardo P et al. (2003) Phase III trial of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel as front-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: an intergroup trial (E1193). Journal of Clinical Oncology 21:588–592.

  64. 64.

    Smith RE, Brown AM, Mamounas EP et al. (1999) Randomized trial of 3-h versus 24-h infusion of high-dose paclitaxel in patients with metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-26. J Clin Oncol 17:3403–3411.

  65. 65.

    Sparano JA, Makhson AN, Semiglazov VF et al. (2009) Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus docetaxel significantly improves time to progression without additive cardiotoxicity compared with docetaxel monotherapy in patients with advanced breast cancer previously treated with neoadjuvant-adjuvant anthracycline therapy: results from a randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol 27:4522–4529.

  66. 66.

    Swain SM, Kim S, Cortés J et al. (2013) Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CLEOPATRA study): overall survival results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. The Lancet Oncology 14:461–471.

  67. 67.

    Turner NC, Ro J, André F et al. (2015) Palbociclib in hormone-receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 373:209–219.

  68. 68.

    Verma S, Miles D, Gianni L et al. (2012) Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 367:1783–1791.

  69. 69.

    Wardley AM, Pivot X, Morales-Vasquez F et al. (2010) Randomized phase II trial of first-line trastuzumab plus docetaxel and capecitabine compared with trastuzumab plus docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 28:976–983.

  70. 70.

    Winer EP, Berry DA, Woolf S et al. (2004) Failure of higher-dose paclitaxel to improve outcome in patients with metastatic breast cancer: cancer and leukemia group B trial 9342. Journal of clinical oncology 22:2061–2068.

  71. 71.

    Yardley DA, Burris HA, Spigel DR et al. (2009) A phase II randomized crossover study of liposomal doxorubicin versus weekly docetaxel in the first-line treatment of women with metastatic breast cancer. Clinical breast cancer 9:247–252.

  72. 72.

    Zielinski C, Beslija S, Mrsic-Krmpotic Z et al. (2005) Gemcitabine, epirubicin, and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a Central European Cooperative Oncology Group International, multicenter, prospective, randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 23:1401–1408.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Adunlin, G., Cyrus, J.W.W. & Dranitsaris, G. Correlation between progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic breast cancer patients receiving anthracyclines, taxanes, or targeted therapies: a trial-level meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 154, 591–608 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3643-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3643-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation