Literature DB >> 27730423

Assessment of pathologic response and long-term outcome in locally advanced breast cancers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: comparison of pathologic classification systems.

Misun Choi1, Yeon Hee Park2, Jin Seok Ahn2, Young-Hyuck Im2, Seok Jin Nam3, Soo Youn Cho4, Eun Yoon Cho5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Several pathologic classification systems have been developed to evaluate tumor response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer. We aimed to compare pathologic classification systems and to investigate prognostic factors and risk stratification according to molecular subtype in relation to survival.
METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated pathologic response after NAC in 485 breast cancer patients by applying the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B18 trial (NSABP-B18), Miller and Payne system, Chevallier's classification, Sataloff's classification, residual cancer burden (RCB), residual disease in breast and nodes (RDBN), and clinical-pathologic stage + estrogen receptor status and grade staging system (CPS + EG).
RESULTS: All seven classification systems were significantly associated with overall survival (OS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). Regarding intrinsic subtypes, all systems were significantly associated with OS and DDFS for triple-negative tumors. Only RCB had prognostic significance for all four subtypes in relation to both OS and DDFS, and RDBN in DDFS only for all subtypes. In risk factor analyses, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), as well as other classic pathologic prognostic factors such as tumor size, lymph node status, and hormonal receptor status, was significantly associated with both OS and DDFS for the entire study group. Regarding subtypes, LVI was associated with DDFS for each subtype except Luminal B-like tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that pathologic classification systems that evaluate residual tumors in both breast and lymph nodes after NAC show better association with clinical outcome. Furthermore, combining LVI with other classic prognostic factors might have prognostic value for the assessment of treatment response after NAC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast neoplasm; Chemotherapy; Classification; Comparison; Neoadjuvant; Response

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27730423     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-4008-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  10 in total

1.  Clinical and biological impact of miR-18a expression in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Ginés Luengo-Gil; Elena García-Martínez; Asunción Chaves-Benito; Pablo Conesa-Zamora; Esther Navarro-Manzano; Enrique González-Billalabeitia; Elisa García-Garre; Alberto Martínez-Carrasco; Vicente Vicente; Francisco Ayala de la Peña
Journal:  Cell Oncol (Dordr)       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 6.730

2.  Prognostic value of residual cancer burden and Miller-Payne system after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Yinhua Liu; Hong Zhang; Shuang Zhang; Xuening Duan; Jingming Ye; Ling Xu; Jianxin Zhao; Yuanjia Cheng; Qian Liu
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-12

3.  External verification and improvement of the Neo-Bioscore staging system in a Chinese cohort.

Authors:  Rui Geng; Ningning Min; Yiqiong Zheng; Chenyan Hong; Rilige Wu; Huan Wu; Yufan Wei; Yanjun Zhang; Xiru Li
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-06

4.  Tumor mutation burden and JARID2 gene alteration are associated with short disease-free survival in locally advanced triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Xiangmei Zhang; Jingping Li; Qing Yang; Yanfang Wang; Xinhui Li; Yunjiang Liu; Baoen Shan
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-09

5.  Therapeutic Effect of Trastuzumab in Neoadjuvant-Treated HER2-Positive Breast Cancer with Low Infiltrating Level of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes.

Authors:  Shiwei Liu; Exian Mou; Shiyan Zeng; Lu Wang; Hao Dong; Juan Ji; Hong Yang; Junjie Li; Hao Wang; Hui Li; Jia Xu
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 3.989

6.  Validation of Residual Cancer Burden as Prognostic Factor for Breast Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Authors:  Hannah Deborah Müller; Florian Posch; Christoph Suppan; Ute Bargfrieder; Melanie Gumpoldsberger; Robert Hammer; Hubert Hauser; Nadia Dandachi; Kurt Prein; Herbert Stoeger; Sigurd Lax; Marija Balic
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Efficacy and Safety of Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel Compared to Docetaxel as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Zhi-Dong Lv; Hong-Ming Song; Zhao-He Niu; Gang Nie; Shuai Zheng; Ying-Ying Xu; Wei Gong; Hai-Bo Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Predicting pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer using multiparametric MRI.

Authors:  Nannan Lu; Jie Dong; Xin Fang; Lufang Wang; Wei Jia; Qiong Zhou; Lingyu Wang; Jie Wei; Yueyin Pan; Xinghua Han
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-10-23       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  Patterns of Recurrence after Neoadjuvant Therapy in Early Breast Cancer, according to the Residual Cancer Burden Index and Reductions in Neoadjuvant Treatment Intensity.

Authors:  Christoph Suppan; Florian Posch; Hannah Deborah Mueller; Nina Mischitz; Daniel Steiner; Eva Valentina Klocker; Lisa Setaffy; Ute Bargfrieder; Robert Hammer; Hubert Hauser; Philipp J Jost; Nadia Dandachi; Sigurd Lax; Marija Balic
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 6.639

10.  Validation of CPS+EG, Neo-Bioscore, and modified Neo-Bioscore staging systems after preoperative systemic therapy of breast cancer: Protocol of a retrospective multicenter cohort study in China.

Authors:  Ling Xu; Zhuo Zhang; Qianxin Liu; Bin Zhou; Yinhua Liu; Qian Xiang; Sainan Zhu; Xuening Duan; Yimin Cui
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 3.500

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.