Soo Yeon Baek1, Jisun Kim1, Il Yong Chung1, Beom Seok Ko1, Hee Jeong Kim1, Jong Won Lee1, Byung Ho Son1, Sei-Hyun Ahn1, Sae Byul Lee2. 1. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. 2. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. newstar153@hanmail.net.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated the benefit of chemotherapy in patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) by comparing the survival outcomes between the chemotherapy and no chemotherapy groups, using propensity score matching (PSM), and analyze the survival outcomes stratified by hormone receptor status of IBTR. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who developed invasive IBTR after undergoing breast-conserving surgery at our institution between 1990 and 2013. A 1:1 PSM analysis was performed to compare the survival rates between the two study groups; additional analysis stratified by hormone receptor status was performed. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare the second recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates between the two groups. RESULTS: The 217 IBTR patients had a median follow-up of 125.3 months. After PSM, patients without chemotherapy and with chemotherapy (n = 35 in both groups) were included. No significant differences were observed in the 10-year second RFS [50.2% without chemotherapy vs. 39.8% with chemotherapy, hazard ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-1.80], DMFS (85.4% vs. 70.3%, HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.66-3.44), and OS (81.6% vs. 68.6%, HR 1.73, 95% CI 0.76-3.90) rates between the two groups. Analyses stratified by hormone receptor status showed similar findings: no significant differences were observed in the second RFS, DMFS, and OS rates between the two groups in both hormone receptor-positive and -negative groups. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy had no impact in the long-term survival outcomes of IBTR patients regardless of the hormone receptor status.
PURPOSE: We evaluated the benefit of chemotherapy in patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) by comparing the survival outcomes between the chemotherapy and no chemotherapy groups, using propensity score matching (PSM), and analyze the survival outcomes stratified by hormone receptor status of IBTR. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who developed invasive IBTR after undergoing breast-conserving surgery at our institution between 1990 and 2013. A 1:1 PSM analysis was performed to compare the survival rates between the two study groups; additional analysis stratified by hormone receptor status was performed. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare the second recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates between the two groups. RESULTS: The 217 IBTR patients had a median follow-up of 125.3 months. After PSM, patients without chemotherapy and with chemotherapy (n = 35 in both groups) were included. No significant differences were observed in the 10-year second RFS [50.2% without chemotherapy vs. 39.8% with chemotherapy, hazard ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-1.80], DMFS (85.4% vs. 70.3%, HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.66-3.44), and OS (81.6% vs. 68.6%, HR 1.73, 95% CI 0.76-3.90) rates between the two groups. Analyses stratified by hormone receptor status showed similar findings: no significant differences were observed in the second RFS, DMFS, and OS rates between the two groups in both hormone receptor-positive and -negative groups. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy had no impact in the long-term survival outcomes of IBTR patients regardless of the hormone receptor status.
Authors: Irene L Wapnir; Stewart J Anderson; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Charles E Geyer; Jong-Hyeon Jeong; Elizabeth Tan-Chiu; Bernard Fisher; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: O Gentilini; E Botteri; N Rotmensz; B Santillo; N Peradze; R C Saihum; M Intra; A Luini; V Galimberti; A Goldhirsch; U Veronesi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2006-12-08 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Stefan Aebi; Shari Gelber; Stewart J Anderson; István Láng; André Robidoux; Miguel Martín; Johan W R Nortier; Alexander H G Paterson; Mothaffar F Rimawi; José Manuel Baena Cañada; Beat Thürlimann; Elizabeth Murray; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Charles E Geyer; Karen N Price; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Priya Rastogi; Norman Wolmark; Irene L Wapnir Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Stewart J Anderson; Irene Wapnir; James J Dignam; Bernard Fisher; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Jong-Hyeon Jeong; Charles E Geyer; D Lawrence Wickerham; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-04-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: T Kolben; T M Schwarz; C Goess; C Blume; T Degenhardt; J Engel; R Wuerstlein; N Ditsch; N Harbeck; S Kahlert Journal: Int J Surg Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 6.071
Authors: Bernard Fisher; Stewart Anderson; John Bryant; Richard G Margolese; Melvin Deutsch; Edwin R Fisher; Jong-Hyeon Jeong; Norman Wolmark Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-10-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Irene L Wapnir; Karen N Price; Stewart J Anderson; André Robidoux; Miguel Martín; Johan W R Nortier; Alexander H G Paterson; Mothaffar F Rimawi; István Láng; José Manuel Baena-Cañada; Beat Thürlimann; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Charles E Geyer; Shari Gelber; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Priya Rastogi; Meredith M Regan; Norman Wolmark; Stefan Aebi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 50.717