Background: Whether a sequential or concurrent regimen of anthracyclines and taxanes is superior for breast cancer is controversial. We compared the efficacy of two regimens in patients with operable breast cancer based on all relevant published data of phase III randomized controlled trials.
Methods: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed up to May 2020. Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the different efficacy on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for the two chemotherapy regimens. Subgroup analyses were further carried out in terms of node status and anthracycline selection.
Results: Compared to the concurrent regimen, the sequential regimen did not improve the DFS or OS in the population studied. Subgroup analysis showed that in node-positive patients, the sequential regimen had better DFS, but not OS, than the concurrent regimen. In sequential regimen, patients who received doxorubicin and taxanes had improved DFS and OS than patients who were administered epirubicin and taxanes. Furthermore, for patients who received doxorubicin and taxanes, compared to the sequential regimen, fewer cycles (4 cycles) of concurrent treatment resulted in a worse DFS and OS, which can be rescued by more cycles (6 cycles).
Conclusions: The sequential regimen of anthracyclines and taxanes for patients with operable breast cancer did not yield a significant benefit in DFS or OS over the concurrent regimen. The sequential regimen, however, provided a better DFS than concurrent regimen for node-positive patients. Interestingly, further subgroup analysis showed that for node-positive patients who were given doxorubicin and taxanes, more cycles (6 cycles) of the concurrent regimen may rescue the efficacy for fewer cycles (4 cycles).
Keywords: Anthracycline; Breast cancer; Concurrent regimen; Sequential regimen; Taxanes.