METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with T3-4, N2 M0 breast cancer diagnosed between January 2005 and December 2008 and who received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible for this study. Thirty-four patients were identified from the Chemotherapy Daycare Records and their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen administered was at the discretion of the treating oncologist. Breast tumour size and nodal status was assessed at diagnosis, at each cycle and before surgery.
RESULTS: All 34 patients had invasive ductal cancer. The median age was 52 years (range 27-69). 65% had T4 disease and 76% were clinically lymph node positive at diagnosis. The median size of the breast tumour at presentation was 80 mm (range 42-200 mm). Estrogen and progesterone receptor positivity was seen in less than 40% and HER2 positivity, by immunohistochemistry, in 27%. The majority (85%) of patients had anthracycline based chemotherapy, without taxanes. The overall response rate (clinical CR+PR) was 67.6% and pathological complete responses were apparent in two (5.9%). 17.6% of patients defaulted part of their planned treatment. Recurrent disease was seen in 44.1% and the median time to relapse was 11.3 months. The three year disease free and overall survival rates were 52.5% and 58% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer in a Malaysian setting confers response and pCR rates comparable to published clinical trials. Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy are at risk of defaulting part of their treatment and therefore their concerns need to be identified proactively and addressed in order to improve outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review has been to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of available combined treatments modalities in the treatment of neovascular AMD.
DATA SOURCES: Central and Medline were searched for original research studies (Phase I, II, III), abstracts, and review articles concerning combination therapies for the control of neovascular AMD. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
RESULTS: The results of therapeutic trials focused on the actual options in the management of neovascular AMD are discussed. Intravitreal treatment with substances targeting all isotypes of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) results in a significant increase in visual acuity in patients with neovascular AMD. The combination with occlusive therapies like verteporfin photodynamic therapy (V-PDT) potentially offers a reduction of re-treatment frequency rate and long-term maintenance of the benefit reached. Despite the promise from combining anti-VEGF therapies with V-PDT, other combinations to improve outcomes with V-PDT deserve attention. Corticosteroids demonstrated an antiangiogenic effect and targeted the extravascular components of CNV, such as inflammatory cells and fibrocytes. Nevertheless, the study on the clinical application of corticosteroids will require a better understanding of the potential complications. Further developments interacting with various steps in the angiogenic cascade are under clinical or preclinical evaluation and may soon become available. In AMD the goal of a combination regimen is to address the therapy toward neovascular, inflammatory, and proliferative components of the disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatments strategies are an obvious step providing disease control when it is not achieved with a single therapeutic approach. One risk of using a single therapy to control AMD is a rebound induced by compensatory stimulation of other pathogenetic pathways. Combination therapy is a logical approach to address mechanisms of disease progression that appear to be self-sustaining once initiated.