Literature DB >> 31300338

Does Tumor Size Predict Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in the Modern Era of Biologically Driven Treatment? A Nationwide Study of US Breast Cancer Patients.

Devon Livingston-Rosanoff1, Jessica Schumacher2, Kara Vande Walle3, Trista Stankowski-Drengler3, Caprice C Greenberg3, Heather Neuman3, Lee G Wilke4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tumor size has historically been used to stage breast cancer and guide treatment recommendations. The importance of tumor biology in long-term outcomes is increasingly being acknowledged. No large studies have examined the relative roles of tumor size and receptor status on response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for women who underwent NAC and surgery for unilateral clinical stage I to III (cT1-3) invasive breast cancer from 2010 to 2013. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the relation between receptor status, tumor size, and pathologic complete response (pCR) while controlling for other biologic, sociodemographic, diagnosis, and treatment factors.
RESULTS: We included 38,864 women in this study, most presented with cT2 disease (55%). Patients predominantly had estrogen receptor (ER)/progesterone receptor (PR)-positive (ER/PR+) HER2- (45%) or ER/PR- HER2- (28%) disease. Nineteen percent (7432 patients) had a pCR. cT3 (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.70) but not cT2 cancers (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.02) were associated with lower pCR rates compared with cT1 disease. HER2+ (ER/PR+ HER2+: OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 2.72-3.18; ER/PR- HER2+: OR, 6.45; 95% CI, 5.92-7.02) and ER/PR- HER2- cancers (OR, 3.94; 95% CI, 3.68-4.22) were more likely to experience pCR than those with ER/PR+ HER2- cancers. Receptor status was more strongly associated with pCR than tumor size.
CONCLUSION: Tumor size is independently associated with pCR after NAC after controlling for receptor status, although the effect of receptor status is stronger. These data reinforce the importance of receptor status as well as tumor size, each of which might act as surrogates for tumor biology, in setting expectations for outcomes in patients who undergo NAC.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complete pathologic response; NAC; NCDB; National Cancer Database; TNM staging

Year:  2019        PMID: 31300338      PMCID: PMC6888946          DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2019.05.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer        ISSN: 1526-8209            Impact factor:   3.225


  23 in total

1.  Meta-analysis of the association of breast cancer subtype and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Nehmat Houssami; Petra Macaskill; Gunter von Minckwitz; Michael L Marinovich; Eleftherios Mamounas
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 9.162

2.  Pathological complete response in neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  Patricia Cortazar; Charles E Geyer
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Circulating Tumor Cells in Breast Cancer Patients Treated by Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  François-Clément Bidard; Stefan Michiels; Sabine Riethdorf; Volkmar Mueller; Laura J Esserman; Anthony Lucci; Bjørn Naume; Jun Horiguchi; Rafael Gisbert-Criado; Stefan Sleijfer; Masakazu Toi; Jose A Garcia-Saenz; Andreas Hartkopf; Daniele Generali; Françoise Rothé; Jeffrey Smerage; Laura Muinelo-Romay; Justin Stebbing; Patrice Viens; Mark Jesus M Magbanua; Carolyn S Hall; Olav Engebraaten; Daisuke Takata; José Vidal-Martínez; Wendy Onstenk; Noriyoshi Fujisawa; Eduardo Diaz-Rubio; Florin-Andrei Taran; Maria Rosa Cappelletti; Michail Ignatiadis; Charlotte Proudhon; Denise M Wolf; Jessica B Bauldry; Elin Borgen; Rin Nagaoka; Vicente Carañana; Jaco Kraan; Marisa Maestro; Sara Yvonne Brucker; Karsten Weber; Fabien Reyal; Dominic Amara; Mandar G Karhade; Randi R Mathiesen; Hideaki Tokiniwa; Antonio Llombart-Cussac; Alessandra Meddis; Paul Blanche; Koenraad d'Hollander; Paul Cottu; John W Park; Sibylle Loibl; Aurélien Latouche; Jean-Yves Pierga; Klaus Pantel
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Axillary Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: A Predictive Model Integrating the Imaging Characteristics of Ultrasound Restaging with Known Clinicopathologic Characteristics.

Authors:  Won Hwa Kim; Hye Jung Kim; Ho Yong Park; Ji Young Park; Yee Soo Chae; So Mi Lee; Seung Hyun Cho; Kyung Min Shin; Sang Yub Lee
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  A Predictive Model for Axillary Node Pathologic Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Olga Kantor; Lynn McNulty Sipsy; Katharine Yao; Ted A James
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Gunter von Minckwitz; Michael Untch; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Serban D Costa; Holger Eidtmann; Peter A Fasching; Bernd Gerber; Wolfgang Eiermann; Jörn Hilfrich; Jens Huober; Christian Jackisch; Manfred Kaufmann; Gottfried E Konecny; Carsten Denkert; Valentina Nekljudova; Keyur Mehta; Sibylle Loibl
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Institutional variation in the surgical treatment of breast cancer: a study of the NCCN.

Authors:  Caprice C Greenberg; Stuart R Lipsitz; Melissa E Hughes; Stephen B Edge; Richard Theriault; John L Wilson; W Bradford Carter; Douglas W Blayney; Joyce Niland; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Comparison of the prognostic significance of Chevallier and Sataloff's pathologic classifications after neoadjuvant chemotherapy of operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Frederique Penault-Llorca; Catherine Abrial; Ines Raoelfils; Anne Cayre; Marie-Ange Mouret-Reynier; Marianne Leheurteur; Xavier Durando; Jean-Louis Achard; Pierre Gimbergues; Philippe Chollet
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2008-06-10       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 9.  Incorporating Biologic Factors into the American Joint Committee on Cancer Breast Cancer Staging System: Review of the Supporting Evidence.

Authors:  Anna Weiss; Tari A King; Kelly K Hunt; Elizabeth A Mittendorf
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 10.  Using the NCDB for cancer care improvement: an introduction to available quality assessment tools.

Authors:  Mehul V Raval; Karl Y Bilimoria; Andrew K Stewart; David J Bentrem; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 3.454

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Predictive Biomarkers of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: Current and Future Perspectives for Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Françoise Derouane; Cédric van Marcke; Martine Berlière; Amandine Gerday; Latifa Fellah; Isabelle Leconte; Mieke R Van Bockstal; Christine Galant; Cyril Corbet; Francois P Duhoux
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 6.575

2.  Individualized model for predicting pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer: A multicenter study.

Authors:  Bei Qian; Jing Yang; Jun Zhou; Longqing Hu; Shoupeng Zhang; Min Ren; Xincai Qu
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 6.055

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.