Literature DB >> 9704717

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer.

B Fisher1, J Bryant, N Wolmark, E Mamounas, A Brown, E R Fisher, D L Wickerham, M Begovic, A DeCillis, A Robidoux, R G Margolese, A B Cruz, J L Hoehn, A W Lees, N V Dimitrov, H D Bear.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine, in women with primary operable breast cancer, if preoperative doxorubicin (Adriamycin) and cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; AC) therapy yields a better outcome than postoperative AC therapy, if a relationship exists between outcome and tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy, and if such therapy results in the performance of more lumpectomies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women (1,523) enrolled onto National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-18 were randomly assigned to preoperative or postoperative AC therapy. Clinical tumor response to preoperative therapy was graded as complete (cCR), partial (cPR), or no response (cNR). Tumors with a cCR were further categorized as either pathologic complete response (pCR) or invasive cells (pINV). Disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and survival were estimated through 5 years and compared between treatment groups. In the preoperative arm, proportional-hazards models were used to investigate the relationship between outcome and tumor response.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in DFS, DDFS, or survival (P = .99, .70, and .83, respectively) among patients in either group. More patients treated preoperatively than postoperatively underwent lumpectomy and radiation therapy (67.8% v 59.8%, respectively). Rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after lumpectomy were similar in both groups (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively; P = .23). Outcome was better in women whose tumors showed a pCR than in those with a pINV, cPR, or cNR (relapse-free survival [RFS] rates, 85.7%, 76.9%, 68.1%, and 63.9%, respectively; P < .0001), even when baseline prognostic variables were controlled. When prognostic models were compared for each treatment group, the preoperative model, which included breast tumor response as a variable, discriminated outcome among patients to about the same degree as the postoperative model.
CONCLUSION: Preoperative chemotherapy is as effective as postoperative chemotherapy, permits more lumpectomies, is appropriate for the treatment of certain patients with stages I and II disease, and can be used to study breast cancer biology. Tumor response to preoperative chemotherapy correlates with outcome and could be a surrogate for evaluating the effect of chemotherapy on micrometastases; however, knowledge of such a response provided little prognostic information beyond that which resulted from postoperative therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9704717     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2672

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  490 in total

Review 1.  New data on adjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  A C Wolff; N E Davidson
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.075

2.  Breast self-examination.

Authors:  Leo Mahoney
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: a new avenue to be explored.

Authors:  Jan Buter; Herbert M Pinedo
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.075

4.  Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27.

Authors:  Eleftherios P Mamounas; Stewart J Anderson; James J Dignam; Harry D Bear; Thomas B Julian; Charles E Geyer; Alphonse Taghian; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer judged by PERCIST - multicenter study in Japan.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Kitajima; Koya Nakatani; Kazushige Yamaguchi; Masatoyo Nakajo; Atsushi Tani; Mana Ishibashi; Keiko Hosoya; Takahiro Morita; Takayuki Kinoshita; Hayato Kaida; Yasuo Miyoshi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-05-12       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Clinical practice guidelines for the care and treatment of breast cancer: mastectomy or lumpectomy? The choice of operation for clinical stages I and II breast cancer (summary of the 2002 update).

Authors:  Hugh Scarth; Jacques Cantin; Mark Levine
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-07-23       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  The role of biological markers as predictors of response to preoperative chemotherapy in large primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Veronique F Cocquyt; Vera R Schelfhout; Phillip N Blondeel; Herman T Depypere; Kristof K Daems; Rudolphe F Serreyn; Marleen M Praet; Simon J P Van Belle
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.064

8.  Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment for breast cancer: from bedside to bench and back again?

Authors:  R R Saleh; N Bouganim; J Hilton; A Arnaout; M Clemons
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.677

9.  Radiation-induced gene signature predicts pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Daniel S Oh; Maggie C U Cheang; Cheng Fan; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 10.  Management of the Axilla after Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy.

Authors:  Trista J Stankowski-Drengler; Heather B Neuman
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2020-05-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.