Joohyun Woo1, Se Jeong Oh2, Jeong-Yoon Song3, Byung Joo Chae4, Jung Eun Choi5, Jeeyeon Lee6, Heung Kyu Park7, Woosung Lim8. 1. Department of Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, 1071, Anyangcheon-ro, Yancheon-gu, Seoul, 07985, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Incheon, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Breast Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Surgery, Yeungnam University Hospital, Deagu, Republic of Korea. 6. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Republic of Korea. 7. Department of Breast Surgery, Gachon university Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Republic of Korea. 8. Department of Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, 1071, Anyangcheon-ro, Yancheon-gu, Seoul, 07985, Republic of Korea. limw@ewha.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC), young age is associated with poor prognosis. While very young patients respond better to chemotherapy, chemotherapy is less effective in ER-positive tumors than in ER-negative tumors. The authors tried to evaluate chemotherapy response of very young patients with ER-positive BC by pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy excluding the effect of endocrine treatment to the extent possible. METHODS: We collected individual patient data from 1992 to 2013 from the Korean Breast Cancer Society (KBCS). Total 1048 ER-positive and 797 ER-negative patients aged < 50 years who had been treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included for analysis. We compared pCR rate between patients aged < 35 years with ER-positive tumors and the other groups. RESULTS: The proportion of patients aged < 35 years was 14.0% of patients with ER-positive BC in this cohort of under 50 years old, and 16.8% of patients with ER-negative BC in this cohort of under 50 years old. Although most characteristics of tumors according to age were comparable, tumors with high Ki-67 expression were more common in patients aged < 35 years than in patients aged 35-49 years in both ER-positive and -negative group (P = 0.001). Breast conservation rates were not significantly different according to age (44.2% vs. 46.8% in ER-positive group, 55.2% vs. 48.0% in ER-negative group). pCR rate was not different according to age in ER-positive group (P = 0.71) but significantly better in patients aged < 35 years in ER-negative group (P = 0.009). After adjusting for confounding variables, young patients maintained the higher probability of pCR than older patients in ER-negative tumors. However, pCR rate did not differ according to age in ER-positive tumors. In multivariate analysis, young age (< 35 years) was correlated with poor overall survival (P = 0.003, HR = 1.98) and there was only one event in a few patients achieved pCR in ER-positive group. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy response based on pCR was not better in young patients (< 35 years) with ER-positive BC than in older premenopausal patients with non-metastatic ER-positive BC. Young age cannot be a predictive factor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive BC. Different biological characteristics such as high proliferative index should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered.
BACKGROUND: In estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC), young age is associated with poor prognosis. While very young patients respond better to chemotherapy, chemotherapy is less effective in ER-positive tumors than in ER-negative tumors. The authors tried to evaluate chemotherapy response of very young patients with ER-positive BC by pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy excluding the effect of endocrine treatment to the extent possible. METHODS: We collected individual patient data from 1992 to 2013 from the Korean Breast Cancer Society (KBCS). Total 1048 ER-positive and 797 ER-negative patients aged < 50 years who had been treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included for analysis. We compared pCR rate between patients aged < 35 years with ER-positive tumors and the other groups. RESULTS: The proportion of patients aged < 35 years was 14.0% of patients with ER-positive BC in this cohort of under 50 years old, and 16.8% of patients with ER-negative BC in this cohort of under 50 years old. Although most characteristics of tumors according to age were comparable, tumors with high Ki-67 expression were more common in patients aged < 35 years than in patients aged 35-49 years in both ER-positive and -negative group (P = 0.001). Breast conservation rates were not significantly different according to age (44.2% vs. 46.8% in ER-positive group, 55.2% vs. 48.0% in ER-negative group). pCR rate was not different according to age in ER-positive group (P = 0.71) but significantly better in patients aged < 35 years in ER-negative group (P = 0.009). After adjusting for confounding variables, young patients maintained the higher probability of pCR than older patients in ER-negative tumors. However, pCR rate did not differ according to age in ER-positive tumors. In multivariate analysis, young age (< 35 years) was correlated with poor overall survival (P = 0.003, HR = 1.98) and there was only one event in a few patients achieved pCR in ER-positive group. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy response based on pCR was not better in young patients (< 35 years) with ER-positive BC than in older premenopausal patients with non-metastatic ER-positive BC. Young age cannot be a predictive factor of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive BC. Different biological characteristics such as high proliferative index should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; ER-positive; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Pathologic complete response; Young patients
Authors: S Aebi; S Gelber; M Castiglione-Gertsch; R D Gelber; J Collins; B Thürlimann; C M Rudenstam; J Lindtner; D Crivellari; H Cortes-Funes; E Simoncini; I D Werner; A S Coates; A Goldhirsch Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-05-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: A de la Rochefordiere; B Asselain; F Campana; S M Scholl; J Fenton; J R Vilcoq; J C Durand; P Pouillart; H Magdelenat; A Fourquet Journal: Lancet Date: 1993-04-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Melinda A Maggard; Jessica B O'Connell; Karen E Lane; Jerome H Liu; David A Etzioni; Clifford Y Ko Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 2.192