Alajos Hajba

High dose toremifene in advanced breast cancer resistant to or relapsed during tamoxifen treatment

SummaryFifty patients with advanced breast cancer refractory to prior tamoxifen therapy were assigned to investigational treatment with high-dose toremifene administered 120 mg orally twice a day. Treatment was generally well tolerated. The majority (80%) of the patients had no side effects, and among the remaining 10 patients reported side effects were mostly mild and/or transient. Two objective tumor responses were observed: one complete response (CR), duration 6.2 months, and one partial response (PR), duration 8 months. The response rate was thus 4% (95% CI: 0.5 to 14%). In addition 3 patients experienced a mixed response, some metastatic sites responding, while at other sites disease progressed; 22 patients had disease stabilization for > 2 months. A subset analysis disclosed that a small subgroup of patients, including 7 patients in this study, who had achieved CR at some of the sites during preceding tamoxifen therapy, experienced a long progressionfree time during high dose toremifene treatment. The median time to progression in this subgroup of patients was 9.4 months (95% CI: 3.8 to 9.4) as opposed to 2.1 months (95% CI: 2.0 to 2.8) for all the remaining 43 patients, which is a significant decrease in disease progression (p < 0.03). Such results reveal that although this kind of second-line hormonal treatment with high dose toremifene cannot be recommended for all tamoxifen failures, there might be a subset of patients, i.e. those who achieve CR in some lesion during tamoxifen therapy, who benefit from this type of treatment.

Influence of toremifene on the endocrine regulation in breast cancer patients.

In a combined phase I-II study, the hormonal effects of toremifene (TOR) were investigated in 30 patients. Half of the patients received continuous therapy of TOR 60 mg and half 300 mg of TOR orally daily. Serum concentrations of oestradiol (E2), progesterone (PROG), testosterone (TE), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinising hormone (LH), prolactin (PRL), human growth hormone (hGH) and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) were monitored prior to the treatment and at the second, sixth, eighth and twelfth weeks. The influence of TOR upon the hypothalamo-hypophyseal axis was investigated by the TRH (thyroid-stimulating hormone releasing hormone) functional test using 400 micrograms intravenous injection of TRH for stimulation of PRL secretion. The concentration of E2 decreased during the TOR therapy with 60 mg and 300 mg causing 82 and 71% decreases, respectively (non-significant). PRL was significantly (P < 0.001) suppressed. Both these effects reflect the anti-oestrogenic action of TOR. SHBG increased significantly at both doses of TOR, probably due to a direct oestrogen-like effect of TOR in the liver. TE decreased as a consequence of the elevated SHBG. The TRH-induced PRL release was suppressed by both doses of TOR. There were 17 and 27% reductions at 12 weeks in the 60 and 300 mg groups, respectively. Other hormones measured were not significantly affected by TOR. The hormonal effects of 60 and 300 mg doses of TOR did not differ significantly. Anti-oestrogenic (i.e. decrease of E2), and partially oestrogenic (i.e. increase of SHBG) properties as well as the antiprolactinic effects of TOR may have an overall beneficial effect in the clinical management of breast cancer patients.

The effects of anti-estrogen therapy on lymphocyte functions in breast cancer patients.

The effects of anti‐estrogen therapy (tamoxifen or toremifene) on in vitro lymphocyte functions were investigated in breast cancer patients. We found that the amount of DNA synthesis, with or without PWM stimulation, was decreased in all cancer patient groups compared to normal controls. The number of Ig‐secreting cells was enhanced in unstimulated peripheral blood lymphocyte cultures but decreased in PWM‐stimulated cultures. This occurred in all cancer patient groups investigated, with or without anti‐estrogen therapy, as compared to healthy controls. On the other hand, subsequent samples with two‐month intervals showed that anti‐estrogens can increase PFC responses and inhibit DNA synthesis of peripheral blood lymphocytes in more than half of the patients. Interestingly, the enhancing dexamethasone effect, which usually causes an increase in the number of Ig‐secreting cells in PWM‐stimulated cultures, was also seen more often in anti‐estrogen‐treated patients. These results suggest that anti‐estrogens may have immunoregulatory effects in vivo.

The effect of toremifene therapy on serum immunoglobulin levels in breast cancer

Estrogens and anti‐estrogens enhance the number of immunoglobulin (Ig)‐secreting cells in pokeweed mitogen (PWM)‐stimulated lymphocyte cultures. Lymphocytes from patients who have received anti‐estrogen therapy show similar enhancement of Ig‐secreting cells after PWM stimulation. In this study the effect of anti‐estrogen (toremifene) therapy on serum immunoglobulin (IgA, IgM, IgG) levels in breast cancer patients was investigated. Serum Ig levels were followed up to two years after or during the therapy. An unexpected finding was that the Ig levels decreased during the follow‐up period. This decrease was seen in patients who responded to the therapy as well as in those who did not.

Endocrine mechanism of action of toremifene at the level of the central nervous system in advanced breast cancer patients

Purpose: To differentiate the antagonistic and agonistic effect of toremifene at the level of the hypothalamus-hypophysis axis a leutinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) test was performed during a phase II clinical trial. Methods: In 15 postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and LH release – induced by an LHRH agonist (Suprefact injection, 0.5 mg s.c.) – was monitored during a 16-week period of toremifene treatment (60 mg/day p.o.). Prolactin, estradiol, and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels were also measured. The functional test was carried out prior to toremifene therapy and then 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks afterward. Results: The drug sensitized the pituitary to the action of the gonadotrophins; the LHRH-induced FSH and LH release showed a considerably increasing tendency during the toremifene therapy. Estradiol levels decreased statistically significantly and SHBG levels showed a statistically significant increase. A decreased level of prolactin is the sign of an antiestrogenic effect of toremifene on the hypophysis and, as a result, provides evidence for a direct influence of toremifene upon the pituitary. An increase in LH and prolactin release in response to the LHRH test was characteristic in the responders. Conclusion: According to the LHRH test, the antagonistic effect of toremifene seems to be more dominant than the concomitantly existing agonistic property. Neither clinical nor endocrinological side effects could be observed at the level of the CNS during a prolonged period of toremifene administration.