Bresat Cancer Update
Oncology Leader CommentarySpecial FeaturesPrevious Issues

Home: Oncology Leader Commentary: Andrew D. Seidman, MD

Click on the topic below for comments by Dr Andrew D. Seidman to comment on. You will also find links to related articles and clinical trials.

HER-2 and selection of adjuvant therapy
Adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive patients
Adjuvant chemotherapy plus tamoxifen in ER+ patients
Aromatase inhibitors in women with increased risk of thromboembolic complications
Tamoxifen rechallenge in the metastatic setting
Trials of adjuvant Arimidex
Aromatase inhibitors in women who cannot receive adjuvant tamoxifen
Choice of aromatase inhibitors
Chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy for metastatic disease
Herceptin for metastatic disease
Herceptin as a single agent for metastatic disease
HER-2 assays
Trials correlating activity of Herceptin with HER 2 assay
Effect of Herceptin in "HER2-negative" patients

Chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy for metastatic disease

Interview with Neil Love, MD from Breast Cancer Update for Medical Oncologists, Program 3 2000

Play Audio Below:

Often we’re taught classically that when patients present with metastatic disease that’s ER-positive, that you should always, "burn your anti-estrogen bridges before you go to chemotherapy." And I think that’s true in the vast majority of cases, but I think we all occasionally see the patient who has just bad breast cancer that’s ER-positive. By that I mean, multi-organ system disease, bulky disease, significant visceral involvement, impending skeletal crisis, and in those scenarios I think there’s very good rationale for the up front use of chemotherapy and the outback use of hormonal therapy. And just last week a patient was admitted to Memorial who fit that description and we had this discussion – the Fellow and the resident and I – about why we would not start, for example, with antiestrogen therapy. So within that paradigm I can think of many patients in my practice who presented with horrible breast cancer – with pathologic fractures, with hypercalcemia, with liver failure and jaundice – who have been induced to responses with chemotherapy and its attendant toxicities who afterwards have been maintained for years and years and years on agents like tamoxifen and Arimidex. So there’s that group of patients too who have experienced the ravages – in terms of symptoms of breast cancer – who were induced in response with chemotherapy and then maintained with very high quality of life subsequently for a long period of time with antiestrogen treatment.

These perhaps are cases where the tempo of disease is so rapid, and I think that the perception is that chemotherapy works faster. And while we fully expect hormonal therapy to work in these circumstances given the estrogen receptor positivity perhaps the time that it takes, even if its six or eight or 10 or 12 weeks, is too long a time and therefore, the more rapid response that one might see with cytotoxic chemotherapy is justified under those circumstances

Relevant Articles:

Comparison of chemotherapy with chemohormonal therapy as first-line therapy-for metastatic, hormone-sensitive breast cancer: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study.
Sledge, G. W.; Hu, P.; Falkson, G.; Tormey, D., and Abeloff, M.. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 18(2):262-266, 2000 Jan.

Top of Page

Home · Contact us
Terms of use and general disclaimer