Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Nikolay V. Dimitrov is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Nikolay V. Dimitrov.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1998

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer.

Bernard Fisher; John Bryant; Norman Wolmark; Eleftherios P. Mamounas; A Brown; Edwin R. Fisher; D L Wickerham; Mirsada Begovic; Arthur DeCillis; André Robidoux; Richard G. Margolese; A B Cruz; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Harry D. Bear

PURPOSE To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response. RESULTS There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model. CONCLUSION Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1989

A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Tamoxifen in the Treatment of Patients with Node-Negative Breast Cancer Who Have Estrogen-Receptor–Positive Tumors

Bernard Fisher; Joseph P. Costantino; Carol K. Redmond; Poisson R; Bowman D; Couture J; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Norman Wolmark; D. L. Wickerham; Edwin R. Fisher

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of postoperative therapy with tamoxifen (10 mg twice a day) in 2644 patients with breast cancer, histologically negative axillary nodes, and estrogen-receptor-positive (greater than or equal to 10 fmol) tumors. No survival advantage was observed during four years of follow-up (92 percent for placebo vs. 93 percent for tamoxifen; P = 0.3). There was a significant prolongation of disease-free survival among women treated with tamoxifen, as compared with those receiving placebo (83 percent vs. 77 percent; P less than 0.00001). This advantage was observed in both the patients less than or equal to 49 years old (P = 0.0005) and those greater than or equal to 50 (P = 0.0008), particularly in the former, among whom the rate of treatment failure was reduced by 44 percent. Multivariate analysis indicated that all subgroups of patients benefited. Tamoxifen significantly reduced the rate of treatment failure at local and distant sites, tumors in the opposite breast, and the incidence of tumor recurrence after lumpectomy and breast irradiation. The benefit was attained with a low incidence of clinically appreciable toxic effects. The magnitude of the improvement obtained does not preclude the need for future trials in which patients given tamoxifen could serve as the control group in an evaluation of potentially better therapies. Tamoxifen treatment is justified in patients who meet the eligibility criteria of the present study and who refuse to participate in those trials. Since patients with tumors too small for conventional analysis of estrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor concentrations were not eligible for this study, no information is available to indicate that such patients should receive tamoxifen.


The Lancet | 1999

Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial

Bernard Fisher; James J. Dignam; Norman Wolmark; D. Lawrence Wickerham; Edwin R. Fisher; Eleftherios P. Mamounas; Roy E. Smith; Mirsada Begovic; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Richard G. Margolese; Carl G. Kardinal; Maureen Kavanah; Louis Fehrenbacher; Robert Oishi

BACKGROUND We have shown previously that lumpectomy with radiation therapy was more effective than lumpectomy alone for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We did a double-blind randomised controlled trial to find out whether lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen was of more benefit than lumpectomy and radiation therapy alone for DCIS. METHODS 1804 women with DCIS, including those whose resected sample margins were involved with tumour, were randomly assigned lumpectomy, radiation therapy (50 Gy), and placebo (n=902), or lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen (20 mg daily for 5 years, n=902). Median follow-up was 74 months (range 57-93). We compared annual event rates and cumulative probability of invasive or non-invasive ipsilateral and contralateral tumours over 5 years. FINDINGS Women in the tamoxifen group had fewer breast-cancer events at 5 years than did those on placebo (8.2 vs 13.4%, p=0.0009). The cumulative incidence of all invasive breast-cancer events in the tamoxifen group was 4.1% at 5 years: 2.1% in the ipsilateral breast, 1.8% in the contralateral breast, and 0.2% at regional or distant sites. The risk of ipsilateral-breast cancer was lower in the tamoxifen group even when sample margins contained tumour and when DCIS was associated with comedonecrosis. INTERPRETATION The combination of lumpectomy, radiation therapy, and tamoxifen was effective in the prevention of invasive cancer.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1993

Lumpectomy Compared with Lumpectomy and Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Intraductal Breast Cancer

Bernard Fisher; Joseph P. Costantino; Carol K. Redmond; Edwin R. Fisher; Richard G. Margolese; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Norman Wolmark; D. Lawrence Wickerham; Melvin Deutsch; Liora Ore; Eleftherios P. Mamounas; William Poller; Maureen Kavanah

BACKGROUND AND METHODS Women with ductal carcinoma in situ have been treated both by lumpectomy and by lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy, but the benefit of combined therapy is uncertain. A group of 818 women with ductal carcinoma in situ were randomly assigned to undergo lumpectomy or lumpectomy followed by breast irradiation (50 Gy). Sufficient tissue was removed that the margins of the resected specimens were histologically tumor-free. The mean duration of follow-up was 43 months (range, 11 to 86). The principal end point of the study was event-free survival, as defined by the presence of no new ipsilateral or contralateral breast cancers, regional or distant metastases, or other cancers and by no deaths from causes other than cancer. RESULTS Five-year event-free survival was better in the women who received breast irradiation (84.4 percent, vs. 73.8 percent for the women treated by lumpectomy alone; P = 0.001). The improvement was due to a reduction in the occurrence of second ipsilateral breast cancers; the incidence of each of the other events was similar in the two groups. Of 391 women treated by lumpectomy alone, ipsilateral breast cancer developed in 64 (16.4 percent); it was noninvasive in 32 and invasive in the remaining 32. Of 399 women treated with lumpectomy and breast irradiation, ipsilateral breast cancer developed in 28 (7.0 percent) (noninvasive in 20 and invasive in 8). The five-year cumulative incidence of second cancers in the ipsilateral breast was reduced by irradiation from 10.4 percent to 7.5 percent for noninvasive cancers and from 10.5 percent to 2.9 percent for invasive cancers (P = 0.055 and P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Breast irradiation after lumpectomy is more appropriate than lumpectomy alone for women with localized ductal carcinoma in situ.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1998

Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17.

Bernard Fisher; James J. Dignam; Norman Wolmark; Eleftherios P. Mamounas; Joseph P. Costantino; W. Poller; Edwin R. Fisher; D. L. Wickerham; Melvin Deutsch; Richard G. Margolese; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Maureen Kavanah

PURPOSE In 1993, findings from a National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial to evaluate the worth of radiation therapy after lumpectomy concluded that the combination was more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for localized intraductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS). This report extends those findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women (N = 818) with localized DCIS were randomly assigned to lumpectomy or lumpectomy plus radiation (50 Gy). Tissue was removed so that resected specimen margins were histologically tumor-free. Mean follow-up time was 90 months (range, 67 to 130). Size and method of tumor detection were determined by central clinical, mammographic, and pathologic assessment. Life-table estimates of event-free survival and survival, average annual rates of occurrence for specific events, relative risks for event-specific end points, and cumulative probability of specific events comprising event-free survival are presented. RESULTS The benefit of lumpectomy plus radiation was virtually unchanged between 5 and 8 years of follow-up and was due to a reduction in invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumors (IBTs). Incidence of locoregional and distant events remained similar in both treatment groups; deaths were only infrequently related to breast cancer. Incidence of noninvasive IBT was reduced from 13.4% to 8.2% (P = .007), and of invasive IBT, from 13.4% to 3.9% (P < .0001). All cohorts benefited from radiation regardless of clinical or mammographic tumor characteristics. CONCLUSION Through 8 years of follow-up, our findings continue to indicate that lumpectomy plus radiation is more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for women with localized, mammographically detected DCIS. When evaluated according to the mammographic characteristics of their DCIS, all groups benefited from radiation.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1990

Two months of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide with and without interval reinduction therapy compared with 6 months of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil in positive-node breast cancer patients with tamoxifen-nonresponsive tumors: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-15.

Bernard Fisher; A Brown; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; R Poisson; C Redmond; Richard G. Margolese; D Bowman; Norman Wolmark; D L Wickerham; Carl G. Kardinal

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) implemented protocol B-15 to compare 2 months of Adriamycin (doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH) and cyclophosphamide (AC) with 6 months of conventional cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) in patients with breast cancer nonresponsive to tamoxifen (TAM, T). A second aim was to determine whether AC followed in 6 months by intravenous (IV) CMF was more effective than AC without reinduction therapy. Through 3 years of follow-up, findings from 2,194 patients indicate no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS, P = .5), distant disease-free survival (DDFS, P = .5) or survival (S, P = .8) among the three groups. Since the outcome from AC and CMF was almost identical, the issue arises concerning which regimen is more appropriate for the treatment of breast cancer patients. AC seems preferable since, following total mastectomy, AC was completed on day 63 versus day 154 for conventional CMF; patients visited health professionals three times as often for conventional CMF as for AC; women on AC received therapy on each of 4 days versus on each of 84 days for conventional CMF; and nausea-control medication was given for about 84 days to conventional CMF patients versus for about 12 days to patients on AC. The difference in the amount of alopecia between the two treatment groups was less than anticipated. While alopecia was almost universally observed following AC therapy, 71% of the CMF patients also had hair loss and, in 41%, the loss was greater than 50%. This study and NSABP B-16, which evaluates the worth of AC therapy in TAM-responsive patients, indicate the merit of 2 months of AC therapy for all positive-node breast cancer patients.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1989

A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Sequential Methotrexate and Fluorouracil in the Treatment of Patients with Node-Negative Breast Cancer Who Have Estrogen-Receptor-Negative Tumors

Bernard Fisher; Carol K. Redmond; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Bowman D; S. Legault-Poisson; D. L. Wickerham; Norman Wolmark; Edwin R. Fisher; Richard G. Margolese; C. Sutherland; Andrew Glass; Roger S. Foster; R. Caplan

We evaluated the postoperative use of sequential methotrexate and fluorouracil followed by leucovorin in 679 patients with primary breast cancer, histologically negative axillary nodes, and estrogen-receptor-negative (less than 10 fmol) tumors. No survival advantage was observed with this therapy as compared with no postoperative therapy during four years of follow-up (87 percent vs. 86 percent; P = 0.8). However, there was a significant prolongation of disease-free survival among women who received this therapy as compared with those who did not (80 percent vs. 71 percent; P = 0.003). An advantage was observed in both the patients less than or equal to 49 years old and those greater than or equal to 50. At four years, treatment failure was reduced by 24 percent in the younger group and by 50 percent in the older group. The rates of both local and regional and distant metastases were decreased. These benefits, achieved without the use of an alkylating agent, were associated with tolerable side effects. Multivariate analysis testing for potential interactions failed to identify subgroups of patients who did not benefit from the therapy. These results, although promising, do not obviate the need for additional trials to evaluate potentially better regimens of therapy, but they do suggest that sequential methotrexate-fluorouracil should be used in the control arm in such studies. Their use is also justified for the treatment of patients who refuse to participate in clinical trials, provided the patients meet the eligibility criteria of the present study. Since women with tumors too small for conventional analysis of estrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor concentrations were not included in this study, we do not recommend systemic treatment for them outside of a clinical trial.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1997

Increased intensification and total dose of cyclophosphamide in a doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide regimen for the treatment of primary breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-22.

Bernard Fisher; Stewart A. Anderson; D L Wickerham; Arthur DeCillis; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Eleftherios P. Mamounas; Norman Wolmark; R Pugh; James N. Atkins; F J Meyers; Neil Abramson; J Wolter; R S Bornstein; L Levy; Edward H. Romond; V Caggiano; M Grimaldi; P Jochimsen; Peter J. Deckers

PURPOSE The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) initiated a randomized trial (B-22) to determine if intensifying but maintaining the total dose of cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Bristol-Myers Squibb Oncology, Princeton, NJ) in a doxorubicin (Adriamycin, Pharmacia, Kalamazoo, MI)-cyclophosphamide combination (AC), or if intensifying and increasing the total dose of cyclophosphamide improves the outcome of women with primary breast cancer and positive axillary nodes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients (N = 2,305) were randomized to receive either four courses of standard AC therapy (group 1); intensified therapy, in which the same total dose of cyclophosphamide was administered in two courses (group 2); or intensified and increased therapy, in which the total dose of cyclophosphamide was doubled (group 3). The dose and intensity of doxorubicin were similar in all groups. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were determined using life-table estimates. RESULTS There was no significant difference in DFS (P = .30) or overall survival (P = .95) among the groups through 5 years. At 5 years, the DFS of women in group 1 was similar to that of women in group 2 (62% v 60%, respectively; P = .43) and to that of women in group 3 (62% v 64%, respectively; P = .59). The 5-year survival of women in group 1 was similar to that of women in group 2 (78% v 77%, respectively; P = .86) and to that of women in group 3 (78% v 77%, respectively; P = .82). Grade 4 toxicity increased in groups 2 and 3. Failure to note a difference in outcome among the groups was unrelated to either differences in amount and intensity of cyclophosphamide or to dose delays and intervals between courses of therapy. CONCLUSION Intensifying or intensifying and increasing the total dose of cyclophosphamide failed to significantly improve either DFS or overall survival in any group. It was concluded that, outside of a clinical trial, dose-intensification of cyclophosphamide in an AC combination represents inappropriate therapy for women with primary breast cancer.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1990

Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16.

Bernard Fisher; C Redmond; S Legault-Poisson; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; A Brown; D L Wickerham; Norman Wolmark; Richard G. Margolese; D Bowman; Andrew Glass

The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether tamoxifen (TAM) plus chemotherapy is more effective than TAM alone in improving disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival (S) of positive-node, TAM-responsive patients aged greater than or equal to 50 years. Women were randomized among three treatment groups: (1) TAM alone, (2) Adriamycin (doxorubicin; Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH), cyclophosphamide, and TAM (ACT), or (3) melphalan (L-PAM), fluorouracil (5-FU), and TAM (PFT). The PFT arm was later modified so that new patients also received Adriamycin (PAFT). Findings from 1,124 eligible patients through 3 years of follow-up indicated a significantly better DFS for ACT-treated patients than for those receiving TAM alone (84% v 67%; P = .0004). An advantage in DDFS and S was also observed after ACT therapy (83% v 73% [P = .04 in the former] and 93% v 85% [P = .04 in the latter]). Both the DFS and DDFS of PAFT-treated patients were better than in those treated by TAM alone (83% v 66%, P = .0002 and 85% v 73%, P = .003). PFT patients also fared better in DFS and DDFS than TAM patients (81% v 72%, P = .07 and 85% v 74%, P = .02). Odds ratios consistently favored the three TAM-plus-chemotherapy groups. No significant S advantage is as yet evident in favor of the PAFT or PFT groups. Of importance is the failure of these studies to demonstrate an unfavorable interaction between the drug regimens used and the TAM, which was administered simultaneously. The findings related to the use of PAFT and PFT are of more biologic than clinical significance since L-PAM is rarely used in the treatment of breast cancer. The major conclusion from this study is the observance of a better outcome in positive-node breast cancer patients aged greater than or equal to 50 years from the use of postoperative prolonged TAM and short-course AC therapy (completed in 63 days) than from prolonged TAM therapy alone.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1981

Treatment of Primary Breast Cancer with Chemotherapy and Tamoxifen

Bernard Fisher; Carol K. Redmond; Brown A; Norman Wolmark; Wittliff J; Edwin R. Fisher; Plotkin D; Bowman D; Sachs S; Wolter J; Robert Frelick; Desser R; LiCalzi N; Geggie P; Campbell T; Elias Eg; Prager D; Koontz P; Volk H; Nikolay V. Dimitrov; Gardner B; Harvey J. Lerner; Henry Shibata

We studied the possibility that the addition of tamoxifen to L-phenylalanine mustard combined with 5-fluorouracil enhances the benefit from the latter two drugs that has been observed in women with primary breast cancer and positive axillary nodes. Recurrence of disease was reduced at two years in patients given the three-drug regimen whose tumor estrogen-receptor levels were greater than or equal to 10 fmol. Among patients greater than or equal to 50 years old treatment failure was significantly reduced (P less than 0.001): by 51 per cent in those with one to three positive nodes and by 64 per cent in those with four or more. Higher receptor levels were associated with a greater probability of disease-free survival. Patients less than or equal to 49 years old were less responsive: those with one to three positive nodes received no benefit from tamoxifen at any receptor level, whereas those with four or more appeared to have reduced treatment failure associated with higher receptor levels. This adjuvant chemotherapy is not indicated in patients less than or equal to 49 years old whose tumor receptor levels are below 10 fmol; there is a suggestion of benefit in patients greater than or equal to 50 years old whose levels are low.

Collaboration


Dive into the Nikolay V. Dimitrov's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bernard Fisher

University of Pittsburgh

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Norman Wolmark

Allegheny Health Network

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Cheryl Leece

Michigan State University

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge