Multicentre Study to Determine the Feasibility of Using an Integrated Consent Model to Compare Three Standard of Care Regimens for The Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Setting (REaCT-TNBC) (OTT15-04)

November 21, 2025 updated by: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Multicentre Study to Determine the Feasibility of Using an Integrated Consent Model to Compare Three Standard of Care Regimens for The Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Setting (REaCT-TNBC) OTT 15-04

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a term applied to breast cancer cases that have <1% expression of the estrogen receptor (ER) and the progesterone receptor (PR) and do not over express HER2.

TNBC is diagnosed in 15-20% of breast cancer cases and tends to occur in younger women and have biologically more aggressive high grade disease. Clinically, patients with TNBC have a poorer prognosis compared to patients diagnosed with other breast cancer subtypes. Because of the aggressive phenotype and due to observations that systemic chemotherapy offers significantly higher benefit in ER negative disease, current treatment guidelines from provincial and other organizations recommend that patients receive adjuvant systemic chemotherapy for any TNBC greater than 0.5 cm in greatest diameter or node positive independent of primary tumor size.

Currently, there is no world-wide standard recommended chemotherapy regimen for the management of TNBC in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting, with treatments varying from region and institution.

As physicians do not know what the "best" treatment for patients is, genuine uncertainty ("clinical equipoise") exists. Physicians will choose between different "standards" in their personal practice, using idiosyncratic decision making processes, without the physician or the patient knowing the optimal option. This is not good for patients, physicians and society as a whole. Determining the optimal treatment remains an important medical issue for patients, physicians and society. This study will survey opinions on a novel method to allow comparisons of established standard of care prophylactic treatment using the "integrated consent model" as part of a pragmatic clinical trial and attempt to compare head to head standard chemotherapy regimens in patients with TNBC.

Study Overview

Status

Terminated

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

2

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Canada
    • Ontario
      • Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K2H 8L6
        • The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Histologically confirmed primary TNBC breast cancer
  • Planned for chemotherapy
  • ≥18 years of age
  • Able to provide verbal consent
  • Willing to complete a survey

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Metastatic disease
  • Contraindication to one or more of the chemotherapy agents being evaluated in the study

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Dose dense AC-P
Dose dense AC-P (doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles)
Drug: Dose dense AC-P
(doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles)
Other Names:
  • cyclophosphamide
  • doxorubicin
  • paclitaxel
Active Comparator: Dose dense AC
Dose dense AC followed by weekly P (doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly x 12 cycles)
Drug: Dose dense AC
Dose dense AC followed by weekly P (doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 q2weeks x 4 cycles followed by paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly x 12 cycles)
Other Names:
  • cyclophosphamide
  • doxorubicin
  • paclitaxel
Active Comparator: FEC-D
FEC-D (5-FU 500 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 100 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 q3weeks x 3 cycles followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m2 q3weeks x 3 cycles)
Drug: FEC-D
FEC-D (5-FU 500 mg/m2 plus epirubicin 100 mg/m2 plus cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 q3weeks x 3 cycles followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m2 q3weeks x 3 cycles)
Other Names:
  • 5-FU
  • cyclophosphamide
  • docetaxel

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percentage of Patients Who Receive Chemotherapy in the Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Setting for TNBC
Time Frame: One year
Percentage of patients who receive chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting for TNBC compared to the number of participants who after being approached subsequently agree to randomization.
One year
Participant Satisfaction
Time Frame: One year
Participant satisfaction survey. Overall participant satisfaction will be determined using the participant survey
One year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percentage of Participants Who Complete Study Treatment
Time Frame: One year
Percentage of participants who complete study treatment compared to the percentage who discontinue their treatment while on study (compliance) will be calculated using the sites chemotherapy treatment records and data from New Patient Registration.
One year
Hospitalization
Time Frame: One year
The number of participants with adverse effects requiring hospitalization
One year
Treatment Delays
Time Frame: One year
The number of participants with adverse effects requiring treatment delays
One year

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: John Hilton, Dr., The Ottawa Hospital

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

August 30, 2016

Primary Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 18, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 18, 2016

First Posted (Estimated)

February 23, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

December 4, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 21, 2025

Last Verified

November 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 20160078-01H

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe