https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index en-au 5 https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:47165 2) was categorized as follows: 18.5 to < 25, lean; 25 to < 30, overweight; and ≥ 30, obese. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary endpoint, and overall survival (OS) was the secondary endpoint. A second-order interaction was assessed among treatment, BMI, and estrogen receptor (ER) status. Results: There was no difference in DFS or OS according to BMI in the non-docetaxel group, while reduced DFS and OS were observed with increasing BMI category in the docetaxel group. Adjusted hazard ratios for DFS and OS were, respectively, 1.12 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.50; P = .21) and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.60; P = .04) for overweight versus lean groups and were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.62; P = .007) and 1.63 (95% CI, 1.27 to 2.09; P < .001), respectively, for obese versus lean groups. Similar results were obtained when considering ER-negative and ER-positive tumors separately and when considering only patients who received a relative dose intensity ≥ 85% for docetaxel. A joint modifying role of BMI and ER status on treatment effect was evident for DFS (adjusted P = .06) and OS (adjusted P = .04). Conclusion: This retrospective analysis of a large adjuvant trial highlights a differential response to docetaxel according to BMI, which calls for a body composition–based re-evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio of the use of taxanes in breast cancer. These results now must be confirmed in additional series.]]> Wed 14 Dec 2022 15:49:14 AEDT ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:34339 Mon 03 Feb 2020 11:52:07 AEDT ]]>