BACKGROUND: Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) experience a lower pathological complete response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients with invasive ductal carcinoma. This study was intended to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ILC on breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rates. METHODS: Two-hundred eighty-four consecutive patients with pure ILC treated between May 1998 and September 2006 were reviewed. Surgical procedures and long-term outcomes were compared between patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those receiving surgery first. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 84 patients; 200 patients underwent surgery first. The mean tumor size in the neoadjuvant group (4.9 cm) was significantly larger than in patients who underwent surgery first (2.5 cm, p < 0.0001). In the neoadjuvant group, clinical complete response was seen in 10% and partial response in 59%. Overall BCS rates were 17% in the neoadjuvant group compared with 43% in the surgery-first group (p < 0.0001). When controlled for initial tumor size, there was no difference (all p > 0.05) between the groups in terms of (1) the proportion of patients who underwent an initial attempt at BCS, (2) rate of failure of BCS or (3) the proportion of patients undergoing BCS as their final procedure. With a mean follow-up of 47 months, local recurrence (LR) rates were similar between the two groups (1.2% versus 0.5%, p = 0.5). CONCLUSION: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not increase the rates of breast conservation in patients with pure ILC.
BACKGROUND:Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) experience a lower pathological complete response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients with invasive ductal carcinoma. This study was intended to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ILC on breast-conserving surgery (BCS) rates. METHODS: Two-hundred eighty-four consecutive patients with pure ILC treated between May 1998 and September 2006 were reviewed. Surgical procedures and long-term outcomes were compared between patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and those receiving surgery first. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 84 patients; 200 patients underwent surgery first. The mean tumor size in the neoadjuvant group (4.9 cm) was significantly larger than in patients who underwent surgery first (2.5 cm, p < 0.0001). In the neoadjuvant group, clinical complete response was seen in 10% and partial response in 59%. Overall BCS rates were 17% in the neoadjuvant group compared with 43% in the surgery-first group (p < 0.0001). When controlled for initial tumor size, there was no difference (all p > 0.05) between the groups in terms of (1) the proportion of patients who underwent an initial attempt at BCS, (2) rate of failure of BCS or (3) the proportion of patients undergoing BCS as their final procedure. With a mean follow-up of 47 months, local recurrence (LR) rates were similar between the two groups (1.2% versus 0.5%, p = 0.5). CONCLUSION: The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not increase the rates of breast conservation in patients with pure ILC.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Valentina Guarneri; Kristine Broglio; Shu-Wan Kau; Massimo Cristofanilli; Aman U Buzdar; Vicente Valero; Thomas Buchholz; Funda Meric; Lavinia Middleton; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Tubiana-Hulin; D Stevens; S Lasry; J M Guinebretière; L Bouita; C Cohen-Solal; P Cherel; J Rouëssé Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: B Fisher; J Bryant; N Wolmark; E Mamounas; A Brown; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; M Begovic; A DeCillis; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov; H D Bear Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jamie Wagner; Judy C Boughey; Betsy Garrett; Gildy Babiera; Henry Kuerer; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Eva Singletary; Kelly K Hunt; Lavinia P Middleton; Isabelle Bedrosian Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2009-04-10 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Marieke E M van der Noordaa; Ileana Ioan; Emiel J Rutgers; Erik van Werkhoven; Claudette E Loo; Rosie Voorthuis; Jelle Wesseling; Japke van Urk; Terry Wiersma; Vincent Dezentje; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Frederieke H van Duijnhoven Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Ian K Komenaka; Chiu-Hsieh Hsu; Maria Elena Martinez; Marcia E Bouton; Boo Ghee Low; Jason A Salganick; Jesse Nodora; Michael L Hibbard; Chandra Jha Journal: Oncologist Date: 2011-05-09
Authors: Ian K Komenaka; Michael L Hibbard; Chiu-Hsieh Hsu; Boo Ghee Low; Jason A Salganick; Marcia E Bouton; Chandra Jha Journal: Oncologist Date: 2011-05-09
Authors: Abigail S Caudle; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Kelly K Hunt; Lajos Pusztai; Henry M Kuerer; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Funda Meric-Bernstam Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Esther H Lips; Rita A Mukhtar; Christina Yau; Jorma J de Ronde; Chad Livasy; Lisa A Carey; Claudette E Loo; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken-Peeters; Gabe S Sonke; Donald A Berry; Laura J Van't Veer; Laura J Esserman; Jelle Wesseling; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; E Shelley Hwang Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-09-08 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jeon-Hor Chen; Shadfar Bahri; Rita S Mehta; Philip M Carpenter; Christine E McLaren; Wen-Pin Chen; Peter T Fwu; David J B Hsiang; Karen T Lane; John A Butler; Min-Ying Su Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Y Delpech; C Coutant; L Hsu; E Barranger; T Iwamoto; C H Barcenas; G N Hortobagyi; R Rouzier; F J Esteva; L Pusztai Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-01-08 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: W Truin; G Vugts; R M H Roumen; A J G Maaskant-Braat; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; M van der Heiden-van der Loo; V C G Tjan-Heijnen; A C Voogd Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 5.344