Literature DB >> 15641036

Breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Allen M Chen1, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Kelly K Hunt, Howard D Thames, Elesyia D Outlaw, Eric A Strom, Marsha D McNeese, Henry M Kuerer, Merrick I Ross, S Eva Singletary, Fredrick C Ames, Barry W Feig, Aysegul A Sahin, George H Perkins, Gildy Babiera, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, Thomas A Buchholz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The appropriate selection criteria for breast-conserving therapy (BCT) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are poorly defined. The purpose of the current report was to develop a prognostic index to help refine selection criteria and to serve as a general framework for clinical decision-making for patients treated by this multimodality approach.
METHODS: From a group of 340 patients treated with BCT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the authors previously determined 4 statistically significant predictors of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and locoregional recurrence (LRR): clinical N2 or N3 disease, residual pathologic tumor size > than 2 cm, a multifocal pattern of residual disease, and lymphovascular space invasion in the specimen. The M. D. Anderson Prognostic Index (MDAPI) was developed by assigning scores of 0 (favorable) or 1 (unfavorable) for each of these 4 variables and using the total to give an overall MDAPI score of 0-4.
RESULTS: The MDAPI stratified the 340 patients into 3 subsets with statistically different levels of risk for IBTR and LRR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and BCT. Actuarial 5-year IBTR-free survival rates were 97%, 88%, and 82% for patients in the low (MDAPI overall score 0 or 1, n=276), intermediate (MDAPI score 2, n=43), and high (MDAPI score 3 or 4, n=12) risk groups, respectively (P<0.001). Corresponding actuarial 5-year LRR-free survival rates were 94%, 83%, and 58%, respectively (P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with an MDAPI score of 0 or 1, which made up 81% of the study population, had very low rates of IBTR and LRR. The MDAPI enabled the identification of a small group (4%) of patients who are at high risk for IBTR and LRR and who may benefit from alternative locoregional treatment strategies. Copyright (c) 2005 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15641036     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20815

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  23 in total

1.  Locoregional risk assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with primary breast cancer: clinical utility of the CPS + EG score.

Authors:  Laura L Michel; Laura Sommer; Rosa González Silos; Justo Lorenzo Bermejo; Alexandra von Au; Julia Seitz; André Hennigs; Katharina Smetanay; Michael Golatta; Jörg Heil; Florian Schütz; Christof Sohn; Andreas Schneeweiss; Frederik Marmé
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Accuracy of ultrasonography and mammography in predicting pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Jason D Keune; Donna B Jeffe; Mario Schootman; Abigail Hoffman; William E Gillanders; Rebecca L Aft
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Skin involvement and breast cancer: are T4b lesions of all sizes created equal?

Authors:  Diana Silverman; Karen Ruth; Elin R Sigurdson; Brian L Egleston; Lori J Goldstein; Yu-Ning Wong; Marcia Boraas; Richard J Bleicher
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-04-20       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Surgical Considerations After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Breast Conservation Therapy.

Authors:  Thomas A Buchholz; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Kelly K Hunt
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2015-05

5.  Evaluation of the MD Anderson Prognostic Index for local-regional recurrence after breast conserving therapy in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Catherine L Akay; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Kelly K Hunt; Elizabeth G Grubbs; Isabelle Bedrosian; Susan L Tucker; Henry M Kuerer; Karen E Hoffman; Gildy V Babiera; Eric A Strom; Thomas A Buchholz; Elizabeth A Mittendorf
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Age and survival estimates in patients who have node-negative T1ab breast cancer by breast cancer subtype.

Authors:  Rachel L Theriault; Jennifer K Litton; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Huiqin Chen; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Mariana Chavez-Macgregor; Phuong K Morrow; Wendy A Woodward; Aysegul Sahin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Local recurrence rates are low in high-risk neoadjuvant breast cancer in the I-SPY 1 Trial (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657).

Authors:  Elizabeth L Cureton; Christina Yau; Michael D Alvarado; Helen Krontiras; David W Ollila; Cheryl A Ewing; Sindy Monnier; Laura J Esserman
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Breast-conservation Therapy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Compromise 10-Year Breast Cancer-specific Mortality.

Authors:  Renee L Arlow; Lisa E Paddock; Xiaoling Niu; Laurie Kirstein; Bruce G Haffty; Sharad Goyal; Thomas Kearney; Deborah Toppmeyer; Antoinette M Stroup; Atif J Khan
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.339

9.  Reduction and Mastopexy Techniques for Optimal Results in Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Jessica F Rose; Jessica Suarez Colen; Warren A Ellsworth
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.314

Review 10.  Neoadjuvant therapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  Mediget Teshome; Kelly K Hunt
Journal:  Surg Oncol Clin N Am       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 3.495

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.