Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS)

A double-blind, randomised controlled trial

John F. Forbes, Ivana Sestak, Anthony Howell, Bernardo Bonanni, Nigel Bundred, Christelle Levy, Gunter Von Minckwitz, Wolfgang Eiermann, Patrick Neven, Michael Stierer, Chris Holcombe, Robert E. Coleman, Louise Jones, Ian Ellis, Jack Cuzick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

76 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)866-873
Number of pages8
JournalLancet
Volume387
Issue number10021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 27 2016

Fingerprint

Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating
Tamoxifen
Randomized Controlled Trials
Breast Neoplasms
Recurrence
Hormones
Aromatase Inhibitors
Random Allocation
anastrozole
Proportional Hazards Models
Registries
Placebos
Confidence Intervals
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS) : A double-blind, randomised controlled trial. / Forbes, John F.; Sestak, Ivana; Howell, Anthony; Bonanni, Bernardo; Bundred, Nigel; Levy, Christelle; Von Minckwitz, Gunter; Eiermann, Wolfgang; Neven, Patrick; Stierer, Michael; Holcombe, Chris; Coleman, Robert E.; Jones, Louise; Ellis, Ian; Cuzick, Jack.

In: Lancet, Vol. 387, No. 10021, 27.02.2016, p. 866-873.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Forbes, JF, Sestak, I, Howell, A, Bonanni, B, Bundred, N, Levy, C, Von Minckwitz, G, Eiermann, W, Neven, P, Stierer, M, Holcombe, C, Coleman, RE, Jones, L, Ellis, I & Cuzick, J 2016, 'Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial', Lancet, vol. 387, no. 10021, pp. 866-873. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01129-0
Forbes, John F. ; Sestak, Ivana ; Howell, Anthony ; Bonanni, Bernardo ; Bundred, Nigel ; Levy, Christelle ; Von Minckwitz, Gunter ; Eiermann, Wolfgang ; Neven, Patrick ; Stierer, Michael ; Holcombe, Chris ; Coleman, Robert E. ; Jones, Louise ; Ellis, Ian ; Cuzick, Jack. / Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS) : A double-blind, randomised controlled trial. In: Lancet. 2016 ; Vol. 387, No. 10021. pp. 866-873.
@article{e28d23af3c2f4496b0d9eb44bb290e46,
title = "Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial",
abstract = "Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95{\%} CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95{\%} CI",
author = "Forbes, {John F.} and Ivana Sestak and Anthony Howell and Bernardo Bonanni and Nigel Bundred and Christelle Levy and {Von Minckwitz}, Gunter and Wolfgang Eiermann and Patrick Neven and Michael Stierer and Chris Holcombe and Coleman, {Robert E.} and Louise Jones and Ian Ellis and Jack Cuzick",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "27",
doi = "10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01129-0",
language = "English",
volume = "387",
pages = "866--873",
journal = "The Lancet",
issn = "0140-6736",
publisher = "Lancet Publishing Group",
number = "10021",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS)

T2 - A double-blind, randomised controlled trial

AU - Forbes, John F.

AU - Sestak, Ivana

AU - Howell, Anthony

AU - Bonanni, Bernardo

AU - Bundred, Nigel

AU - Levy, Christelle

AU - Von Minckwitz, Gunter

AU - Eiermann, Wolfgang

AU - Neven, Patrick

AU - Stierer, Michael

AU - Holcombe, Chris

AU - Coleman, Robert E.

AU - Jones, Louise

AU - Ellis, Ian

AU - Cuzick, Jack

PY - 2016/2/27

Y1 - 2016/2/27

N2 - Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI

AB - Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6-8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64-1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959482139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959482139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01129-0

DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01129-0

M3 - Article

VL - 387

SP - 866

EP - 873

JO - The Lancet

JF - The Lancet

SN - 0140-6736

IS - 10021

ER -