Giacomo Montagna1, Varadan Sevilimedu2, Monica Fornier3, Komal Jhaveri3, Monica Morrow1, Melissa L Pilewskie4. 1. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Breast Medicine Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. pilewskm@mskcc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) is effective in downstaging large hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancers and increasing rates of breast-conserving surgery (BCS), but data regarding nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) are sparse. We reported nodal and breast downstaging rates with NET, and compared axillary response rates following NET and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS: Consecutive stage I-III breast cancer patients treated with NET and surgery from January 2009 to December 2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Nodal pCR rates were compared between biopsy-proven node-positive patients treated with NET, and HR+/HER2- patients treated with NAC from November 2013 to July 2019. RESULTS: 127 cancers treated with NET and 338 with NAC were included. NET recipients were older, more likely to have lobular and lower-grade tumors, and higher HR expression. With NET, the nodal pCR rate was 11% (4/38) of biopsy-proven cases, and the breast pCR rate was 1.6% (2/126). Nodal-dowstaging rates with NET and NAC were not significantly different (11% vs 18%; P = 0.37). Patients achieving nodal pCR with NET versus NAC were older (median age 70 vs 50, P = 0.004) and had greater progesterone receptor (PR) expression (85% vs 13%, P = 0.031), respectively. Of patients not candidates for BCS due to a large tumor relative to breast size, 36/47 (77%) became BCS-eligible with NET (median PR expression 55% vs 5% in those remaining ineligible, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although nodal pCR is more frequent than breast pCR, NET is more likely to de-escalate breast surgery than axillary surgery. However, with a nodal pCR rate of 11%, NET remains an option for downstaging node-positive patients without clear indications for NAC.
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) is effective in downstaging large hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancers and increasing rates of breast-conserving surgery (BCS), but data regarding nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) are sparse. We reported nodal and breast downstaging rates with NET, and compared axillary response rates following NET and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS: Consecutive stage I-III breast cancerpatients treated with NET and surgery from January 2009 to December 2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Nodal pCR rates were compared between biopsy-proven node-positive patients treated with NET, and HR+/HER2- patients treated with NAC from November 2013 to July 2019. RESULTS: 127 cancers treated with NET and 338 with NAC were included. NET recipients were older, more likely to have lobular and lower-grade tumors, and higher HR expression. With NET, the nodal pCR rate was 11% (4/38) of biopsy-proven cases, and the breast pCR rate was 1.6% (2/126). Nodal-dowstaging rates with NET and NAC were not significantly different (11% vs 18%; P = 0.37). Patients achieving nodal pCR with NET versus NAC were older (median age 70 vs 50, P = 0.004) and had greater progesterone receptor (PR) expression (85% vs 13%, P = 0.031), respectively. Of patients not candidates for BCS due to a large tumor relative to breast size, 36/47 (77%) became BCS-eligible with NET (median PR expression 55% vs 5% in those remaining ineligible, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although nodal pCR is more frequent than breast pCR, NET is more likely to de-escalate breast surgery than axillary surgery. However, with a nodal pCR rate of 11%, NET remains an option for downstaging node-positive patients without clear indications for NAC.
Authors: Anita Mamtani; Andrea V Barrio; Tari A King; Kimberly J Van Zee; George Plitas; Melissa Pilewskie; Mahmoud El-Tamer; Mary L Gemignani; Alexandra S Heerdt; Lisa M Sclafani; Virgilio Sacchini; Hiram S Cody; Sujata Patil; Monica Morrow Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Robert Carpenter; Julie C Doughty; Carolyn Cordiner; Nuala Moss; Ashu Gandhi; Chris Wilson; Chris Andrews; Gillian Ellis; Gerald Gui; Anthony I Skene Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-02-23 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: E Alba; J I Chacon; A Lluch; A Anton; L Estevez; B Cirauqui; E Carrasco; L Calvo; M A Segui; N Ribelles; R Alvarez; A Sanchez-Muñoz; R Sanchez; J A Lopez Garcia-Asenjo; C Rodriguez-Martin; M J Escudero; J Albanell Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-10-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Anna Weiss; Stephanie Wong; Mehra Golshan; Rachel A Freedman; Otto Metzger; Jennifer Bellon; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Tari A King Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Lorenzo Rossi; Amelia McCartney; Emanuela Risi; Irene De Santo; Ilenia Migliaccio; Luca Malorni; Laura Biganzoli; Angelo Di Leo Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Cristina Saura; Dominik Hlauschek; Mafalda Oliveira; Dimitrios Zardavas; Anita Jallitsch-Halper; Lorena de la Peña; Paolo Nuciforo; Alberto Ballestrero; Peter Dubsky; Janine M Lombard; Peter Vuylsteke; Carlos A Castaneda; Marco Colleoni; Giuliano Santos Borges; Eva Ciruelos; Monica Fornier; Katalin Boer; Aditya Bardia; Timothy R Wilson; Thomas J Stout; Jerry Y Hsu; Yi Shi; Martine Piccart; Michael Gnant; José Baselga; Evandro de Azambuja Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-08-08 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Matthew J Ellis; Vera J Suman; Jeremy Hoog; Li Lin; Jacqueline Snider; Aleix Prat; Joel S Parker; Jingqin Luo; Katherine DeSchryver; D Craig Allred; Laura J Esserman; Gary W Unzeitig; Julie Margenthaler; Gildy V Babiera; P Kelly Marcom; Joseph M Guenther; Mark A Watson; Marilyn Leitch; Kelly Hunt; John A Olson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-05-09 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: Judy C Boughey; Linda M McCall; Karla V Ballman; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Gretchen M Ahrendt; Lee G Wilke; Bret Taback; A Marilyn Leitch; Teresa Flippo-Morton; Kelly K Hunt Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Covadonga Martí; Laura Yébenes; José María Oliver; Elisa Moreno; Laura Frías; Alberto Berjón; Adolfo Loayza; Marcos Meléndez; María José Roca; Vicenta Córdoba; David Hardisson; María Ángeles Rodríguez; José Ignacio Sánchez-Méndez Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-03-23 Impact factor: 3.109