Nathalie LeVasseur1, J Sun2, L Gondara3, R Diocee3, C Speers3, C Lohrisch2, S Chia2. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer-Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, V5Z 4E6, Canada. Nathalie.levasseur@bccancer.bc.ca. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer-Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, V5Z 4E6, Canada. 3. Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) has been associated with improved long-term outcomes in clinical trials. However, the benefit of achieving pCR across subtypes and its prognostic effect on real-world outcomes has not been well described. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database was undertaken to identify patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2005 to 2010 in British Columbia. Patients were separated into two groups: those with pCR and those with residual invasive disease in the breast/axillary lymph nodes (RD). The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS). Key secondary endpoints included breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 267 patients identified, 74 patients (28%) achieved pCR and 193 patients (72%) had RD. Median follow-up was 7.5 years. The 5-year RFS was higher in the pCR group compared to the RD group (84% vs 70%; HR 0.45, p = 0.011). The 5-year BCSS was also higher in the pCR group than in the RD group (90% vs 77%; HR 0.39, p = 0.014). In multivariable analyses, pCR was associated with improved RFS (HR 0.39, p = 0.0077) and BCSS (HR 0.35, p = 0.015), whereas traditional pathological prognostic factors were not. Patients with TNBC who achieved pCR had improved RFS and BCSS compared to those with RD (HR 0.26, p = 0.020 and HR 0.35, p = 0.090, respectively). A similar but non-statistically significant trend was seen in the HER-2-positive and ER + subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in survival parameters in a real-world setting. The cumulative data support pCR as a valid surrogate endpoint in both clinical trials and population-based settings.
BACKGROUND: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) has been associated with improved long-term outcomes in clinical trials. However, the benefit of achieving pCR across subtypes and its prognostic effect on real-world outcomes has not been well described. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database was undertaken to identify patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2005 to 2010 in British Columbia. Patients were separated into two groups: those with pCR and those with residual invasive disease in the breast/axillary lymph nodes (RD). The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS). Key secondary endpoints included breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 267 patients identified, 74 patients (28%) achieved pCR and 193 patients (72%) had RD. Median follow-up was 7.5 years. The 5-year RFS was higher in the pCR group compared to the RD group (84% vs 70%; HR 0.45, p = 0.011). The 5-year BCSS was also higher in the pCR group than in the RD group (90% vs 77%; HR 0.39, p = 0.014). In multivariable analyses, pCR was associated with improved RFS (HR 0.39, p = 0.0077) and BCSS (HR 0.35, p = 0.015), whereas traditional pathological prognostic factors were not. Patients with TNBC who achieved pCR had improved RFS and BCSS compared to those with RD (HR 0.26, p = 0.020 and HR 0.35, p = 0.090, respectively). A similar but non-statistically significant trend was seen in the HER-2-positive and ER + subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in survival parameters in a real-world setting. The cumulative data support pCR as a valid surrogate endpoint in both clinical trials and population-based settings.
Authors: B Fisher; A Brown; E Mamounas; S Wieand; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; N Wolmark; A DeCillis; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S M Scholl; A Fourquet; B Asselain; J Y Pierga; J R Vilcoq; J C Durand; T Dorval; T Palangié; M Jouve; P Beuzeboc Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1994 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Mitch Dowsett; Steve R Ebbs; J Michael Dixon; Anthony Skene; Clive Griffith; Irene Boeddinghaus; Janine Salter; Simone Detre; Margaret Hills; Susan Ashley; Stephen Francis; Geraldine Walsh; Ian E Smith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-03-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Luca Gianni; Tadeusz Pienkowski; Young-Hyuck Im; Ling-Ming Tseng; Mei-Ching Liu; Ana Lluch; Elżbieta Starosławska; Juan de la Haba-Rodriguez; Seock-Ah Im; Jose Luiz Pedrini; Brigitte Poirier; Paolo Morandi; Vladimir Semiglazov; Vichien Srimuninnimit; Giulia Valeria Bianchi; Domenico Magazzù; Virginia McNally; Hannah Douthwaite; Graham Ross; Pinuccia Valagussa Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: A Schneeweiss; S Chia; T Hickish; V Harvey; A Eniu; R Hegg; C Tausch; J H Seo; Y-F Tsai; J Ratnayake; V McNally; G Ross; J Cortés Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Gunter von Minckwitz; Chiun-Sheng Huang; Max S Mano; Sibylle Loibl; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Michael Untch; Norman Wolmark; Priya Rastogi; Andreas Schneeweiss; Andres Redondo; Hans H Fischer; William Jacot; Alison K Conlin; Claudia Arce-Salinas; Irene L Wapnir; Christian Jackisch; Michael P DiGiovanna; Peter A Fasching; John P Crown; Pia Wülfing; Zhimin Shao; Elena Rota Caremoli; Haiyan Wu; Lisa H Lam; David Tesarowski; Melanie Smitt; Hannah Douthwaite; Stina M Singel; Charles E Geyer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Lisi M Dredze; Michael Friger; Samuel Ariad; Michael Koretz; Bertha Delgado; Ruthy Shaco-Levy; Margarita Tokar; Michael Bayme; Ravit Agassi; Maia Rosenthal; Victor Dyomin; Olga Belochitski; Shai Libson; Tamar Mizrahi; David B Geffen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: J C Chen; Yaming Li; James L Fisher; Oindrila Bhattacharyya; Allan Tsung; Jose G Bazan; Samilia Obeng-Gyasi Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Marie Osdoit; Christina Yau; W Fraser Symmans; Judy C Boughey; Cheryl A Ewing; Ron Balassanian; Yunn-Yi Chen; Gregor Krings; Anne M Wallace; Somaye Zare; Oluwole Fadare; Rachael Lancaster; Shi Wei; Constantine V Godellas; Ping Tang; Todd M Tuttle; Molly Klein; Sunati Sahoo; Tina J Hieken; Jodi M Carter; Beiyun Chen; Gretchen Ahrendt; Julia Tchou; Michael Feldman; Eleni Tousimis; Jay Zeck; Nora Jaskowiak; Husain Sattar; Arpana M Naik; Marie Catherine Lee; Marilin Rosa; Laila Khazai; Mara H Rendi; Julie E Lang; Janice Lu; Ossama Tawfik; Smita M Asare; Laura J Esserman; Rita A Mukhtar Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 16.681