Laura L Michel1,2, Laura Sommer3,4, Rosa González Silos5, Justo Lorenzo Bermejo5, Alexandra von Au3,4, Julia Seitz3,4, André Hennigs3,4, Katharina Smetanay3,4, Michael Golatta3,4, Jörg Heil3,4, Florian Schütz3,4, Christof Sohn3,4, Andreas Schneeweiss3,4, Frederik Marmé6,7,8. 1. National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Laura.michel@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Laura.michel@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 3. National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 6. National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. frederik.marme@umm.de. 7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Heidelberg, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. frederik.marme@umm.de. 8. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University Hospital Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. frederik.marme@umm.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Locoregional control is a prerequisite to cure primary breast cancer but the prediction of locoregional recurrence to guide further local therapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains a challenge. The CPS + EG score was designed to predict distant recurrences. Here we examine its ability to predict both not only distant but also locoregional recurrences with respect to accuracy and clinical applicability. METHODS: Clinical data from 432 patients with primary breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2003 and 2011 were prospectively collected. Using the Kaplan-Meier method we analyzed the risk of local and distant recurrences according to individual CPS + EG scores, stratified by type of surgery. Possible confounding of the relationship between recurrence risk and CPS + EG score by established risk factors was accounted for in multiple survival regression models. Additionally, we analyzed the performance of the CPS + EG score to predict isolated locoregional recurrence by censoring patients with prior or simultaneous distant metastases. RESULTS: 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival was 90%, and 5-year distant metastases-free survival was 82%. The CPS + EG score stratified patients into six prognostic groups with distinct 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival, ranging from 100 to 41% (p = 0.02) and 5-year distant metastases-free survival, ranging from 96 to 35% (p < 0.0001). 8 patients (17%) with CPS + EG scores ≥ 4 experienced locoregional recurrence-5 of them presented with simultaneous distant disease. CONCLUSION: The CPS + EG score, originally designed to predict distant relapse, is also valuable for assessing local recurrence risks. Our data demonstrate that distant and locoregional recurrence risks are closely related. As prognosis of patients with high risk of locoregional failure based on CPS + EG is dominated by distant recurrences, escalating local therapies may have limited impact on overall prognosis.
PURPOSE: Locoregional control is a prerequisite to cure primary breast cancer but the prediction of locoregional recurrence to guide further local therapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains a challenge. The CPS + EG score was designed to predict distant recurrences. Here we examine its ability to predict both not only distant but also locoregional recurrences with respect to accuracy and clinical applicability. METHODS: Clinical data from 432 patients with primary breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2003 and 2011 were prospectively collected. Using the Kaplan-Meier method we analyzed the risk of local and distant recurrences according to individual CPS + EG scores, stratified by type of surgery. Possible confounding of the relationship between recurrence risk and CPS + EG score by established risk factors was accounted for in multiple survival regression models. Additionally, we analyzed the performance of the CPS + EG score to predict isolated locoregional recurrence by censoring patients with prior or simultaneous distant metastases. RESULTS: 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival was 90%, and 5-year distant metastases-free survival was 82%. The CPS + EG score stratified patients into six prognostic groups with distinct 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival, ranging from 100 to 41% (p = 0.02) and 5-year distant metastases-free survival, ranging from 96 to 35% (p < 0.0001). 8 patients (17%) with CPS + EG scores ≥ 4 experienced locoregional recurrence-5 of them presented with simultaneous distant disease. CONCLUSION: The CPS + EG score, originally designed to predict distant relapse, is also valuable for assessing local recurrence risks. Our data demonstrate that distant and locoregional recurrence risks are closely related. As prognosis of patients with high risk of locoregional failure based on CPS + EG is dominated by distant recurrences, escalating local therapies may have limited impact on overall prognosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
CPS + EG score; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Primary breast cancer; Prognostic index
Authors: J Heil; A Gondos; G Rauch; F Marmé; J Rom; M Golatta; H Junkermann; P Sinn; S Aulmann; J Debus; H Hof; F Schütz; H Brenner; C Sohn; A Schneeweiss Journal: Breast Date: 2012-02-05 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R Rouzier; J M Extra; M Carton; M C Falcou; A Vincent-Salomon; A Fourquet; P Pouillart; E Bourstyn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-09-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael Untch; Peter A Fasching; Gottfried E Konecny; Stephan Hasmüller; Annette Lebeau; Rolf Kreienberg; Oumar Camara; Volkmar Müller; Andreas du Bois; Thorsten Kühn; Elmar Stickeler; Nadia Harbeck; Cornelia Höss; Steffen Kahlert; Thomas Beck; Werner Fett; Keyur M Mehta; Gunter von Minckwitz; Sibylle Loibl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-07-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Allen M Chen; 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 Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Eleftherios P Mamounas; Stewart J Anderson; James J Dignam; Harry D Bear; Thomas B Julian; Charles E Geyer; Alphonse Taghian; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Patricia Cortazar; Lijun Zhang; Michael Untch; Keyur Mehta; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark; Hervé Bonnefoi; David Cameron; Luca Gianni; Pinuccia Valagussa; Sandra M Swain; Tatiana Prowell; Sibylle Loibl; D Lawrence Wickerham; Jan Bogaerts; Jose Baselga; Charles Perou; Gideon Blumenthal; Jens Blohmer; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Jonas Bergh; Vladimir Semiglazov; Robert Justice; Holger Eidtmann; Soonmyung Paik; Martine Piccart; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Peter A Fasching; Leen Slaets; Shenghui Tang; Bernd Gerber; Charles E Geyer; Richard Pazdur; Nina Ditsch; Priya Rastogi; Wolfgang Eiermann; Gunter von Minckwitz Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-02-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Frederik Marmé; Julia Aigner; Justo Lorenzo Bermejo; Peter Sinn; Christof Sohn; Dirk Jäger; Andreas Schneeweiss Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2013-03-16 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Lynn Symonds; Isaac Jenkins; Hannah M Linden; Brenda Kurland; Julie R Gralow; Vijayakrishna V K Gadi; Georgiana K Ellis; Qian Wu; Eve Rodler; Pavani Chalasani; Xiaoyu Chai; Jinny Riedel; Alison Stopeck; Ursa Brown-Glaberman; Jennifer M Specht Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 3.225