Alfredo Berruti1, Vito Amoroso2, Fabio Gallo2, Valentina Bertaglia2, Edda Simoncini2, Rebecca Pedersini2, Laura Ferrari2, Alberto Bottini2, Paolo Bruzzi2, Maria Pia Sormani2. 1. Alfredo Berruti, Vito Amoroso, and Laura Ferrari, University of Brescia at Spedali Civili Hospital; Edda Simoncini and Rebecca Pedersini, Spedali Civili Hospital, Brescia; Fabio Gallo and Maria Pia Sormani, University of Genoa; Paolo Bruzzi, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San Martino, Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Genoa; Valentina Bertaglia, University of Turin, at San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano; and Alberto Bottini, Istituti Ospitalieri Hospital, Cremona, Italy. alfredo.berruti@gmail.com. 2. Alfredo Berruti, Vito Amoroso, and Laura Ferrari, University of Brescia at Spedali Civili Hospital; Edda Simoncini and Rebecca Pedersini, Spedali Civili Hospital, Brescia; Fabio Gallo and Maria Pia Sormani, University of Genoa; Paolo Bruzzi, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San Martino, Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Genoa; Valentina Bertaglia, University of Turin, at San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano; and Alberto Bottini, Istituti Ospitalieri Hospital, Cremona, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the role of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy as surrogate end point of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with breast cancer, we performed a trial-based meta-regression of randomized studies comparing different neoadjuvant systemic treatments. METHODS: The systematic literature search included electronic databases and proceedings of oncologic meetings. Endocrine therapy trials were excluded. Treatment effects on DFS and OS were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs), and treatment effects on pCR were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). A weighted regression analysis was performed on log-transformed treatment effect estimates to test the association between treatment effects on the surrogate outcome and treatment effects on the clinical outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials, 59 arms, and 30 comparisons, for a total of 14,641 patients, were included in the analysis. Using the complete set of data, the regression of either the log(HR) for DFS or the log(HR) for OS on the log(OR) for pCR demonstrated only weak associations (R(2) = 0.08; 95% CI, 0 to 0.47; and R(2) = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.41, respectively). Better associations were found in an exploratory analysis assessing a subset of trials comparing intensified/dose-dense chemotherapy versus standard-dose regimens (DFS: R(2) = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.95; P = .003; and OS: R(2) = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.93; P = .03). CONCLUSION: This meta-regression analysis of 29 heterogeneous neoadjuvant trials does not support the use of pCR as a surrogate end point for DFS and OS in patients with breast cancer. However, pCR may potentially meet the criteria of surrogacy with specific systemic therapies.
PURPOSE: To assess the role of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy as surrogate end point of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with breast cancer, we performed a trial-based meta-regression of randomized studies comparing different neoadjuvant systemic treatments. METHODS: The systematic literature search included electronic databases and proceedings of oncologic meetings. Endocrine therapy trials were excluded. Treatment effects on DFS and OS were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs), and treatment effects on pCR were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). A weighted regression analysis was performed on log-transformed treatment effect estimates to test the association between treatment effects on the surrogate outcome and treatment effects on the clinical outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials, 59 arms, and 30 comparisons, for a total of 14,641 patients, were included in the analysis. Using the complete set of data, the regression of either the log(HR) for DFS or the log(HR) for OS on the log(OR) for pCR demonstrated only weak associations (R(2) = 0.08; 95% CI, 0 to 0.47; and R(2) = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.41, respectively). Better associations were found in an exploratory analysis assessing a subset of trials comparing intensified/dose-dense chemotherapy versus standard-dose regimens (DFS: R(2) = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.95; P = .003; and OS: R(2) = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.93; P = .03). CONCLUSION: This meta-regression analysis of 29 heterogeneous neoadjuvant trials does not support the use of pCR as a surrogate end point for DFS and OS in patients with breast cancer. However, pCR may potentially meet the criteria of surrogacy with specific systemic therapies.
Authors: Lale Kostakoglu; Fenghai Duan; Michael O Idowu; Paul R Jolles; Harry D Bear; Mark Muzi; Jean Cormack; John P Muzi; Daniel A Pryma; Jennifer M Specht; Linda Hovanessian-Larsen; John Miliziano; Sharon Mallett; Anthony F Shields; David A Mankoff Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: David Krug; René Baumann; Wilfried Budach; Jürgen Dunst; Petra Feyer; Rainer Fietkau; Wulf Haase; Wolfgang Harms; Thomas Hehr; Marc D Piroth; Felix Sedlmayer; Rainer Souchon; Frederik Wenz; Rolf Sauer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-07-04 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Ramon Colomer; Cristina Saura; Pedro Sánchez-Rovira; Tomás Pascual; Isabel T Rubio; Octavio Burgués; Lourdes Marcos; César A Rodríguez; Miguel Martín; Ana Lluch Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-02-01
Authors: Francesco Schettini; Tomás Pascual; Benedetta Conte; Nuria Chic; Fara Brasó-Maristany; Patricia Galván; Olga Martínez; Barbara Adamo; Maria Vidal; Montserrat Muñoz; Aranzazu Fernández-Martinez; Carla Rognoni; Gaia Griguolo; Valentina Guarneri; Pier Franco Conte; Mariavittoria Locci; Jan C Brase; Blanca Gonzalez-Farre; Patricia Villagrasa; Sabino De Placido; Rachel Schiff; Jamunarani Veeraraghavan; Mothaffar F Rimawi; C Kent Osborne; Sonia Pernas; Charles M Perou; Lisa A Carey; Aleix Prat Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2020-01-17 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Jose Vila; Susan L Tucker; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Benjamin D Smith; W Fraser Symmans; Aysegul A Sahin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Kelly K Hunt Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Bruce J Tromberg; Zheng Zhang; Anaïs Leproux; Thomas D O'Sullivan; Albert E Cerussi; Philip M Carpenter; Rita S Mehta; Darren Roblyer; Wei Yang; Keith D Paulsen; Brian W Pogue; Shudong Jiang; Peter A Kaufman; Arjun G Yodh; So Hyun Chung; Mitchell Schnall; Bradley S Snyder; Nola Hylton; David A Boas; Stefan A Carp; Steven J Isakoff; David Mankoff Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701