BACKGROUND: There is still a great deal of controversy with regard to the prognostic role of chemotherapy- induced amenorrhea (CIA) in breast cancer patients. To confirm whether CIA can serve as a useful factor in predicting clinical effects of systemic adjuvant chemotherapy, we performed this meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Relevant studies were identified using PubMed, and Embase databases. Eligible study results were pooled and summary hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses and an assessment of publication bias were also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 8,333 patients from 11 published studies were identified through searching the databases. The pooled HRs for disease-free survival (DFS) suggested that CIA was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of recurrence, especially in patients with hormone receptor-positive lesions (overall HR=0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.80, I2= 41.3%). When the five studies reporting the HR for overall survival (OS) were pooled (n=4193), a favorable trend was found (HR=0.69, 95%CI 0.52-0.91, I2= 51.6%). No publication bias was observed in this study. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that CIA predicts a better outcome in premenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: There is still a great deal of controversy with regard to the prognostic role of chemotherapy- induced amenorrhea (CIA) in breast cancerpatients. To confirm whether CIA can serve as a useful factor in predicting clinical effects of systemic adjuvant chemotherapy, we performed this meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Relevant studies were identified using PubMed, and Embase databases. Eligible study results were pooled and summary hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses and an assessment of publication bias were also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 8,333 patients from 11 published studies were identified through searching the databases. The pooled HRs for disease-free survival (DFS) suggested that CIA was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of recurrence, especially in patients with hormone receptor-positive lesions (overall HR=0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.80, I2= 41.3%). When the five studies reporting the HR for overall survival (OS) were pooled (n=4193), a favorable trend was found (HR=0.69, 95%CI 0.52-0.91, I2= 51.6%). No publication bias was observed in this study. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that CIA predicts a better outcome in premenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancerpatients.