Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on surgical outcomes among patients with hormone receptor positive breast cancer

Comparative Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy, Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, and Neoadjuvant Chemo-Endocrine Therapy in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Neoadjuvant therapy before surgery offers varying benefits as a well-established treatment option for breast cancer. This study specifically evaluated the effectiveness of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), and neoadjuvant chemo-endocrine therapy (NCET) in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. This meta-analysis was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic searching was conducted to retrieve articles from databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wanfang. The primary outcome measured by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) focused on assessing pooled effect sizes. Random-effects or fixed-effect models were conducted according to the existence of statistical heterogeneity. A total of 15 eligible articles were included in the analysis. The results indicated clinical response (CR) (OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.73; I 2 = 39.6%) and clinical complete response (cCR) (OR = 0.31; 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.85; I 2 = 68.0%) after NET was significantly higher than NCT. However, no significant difference was shown in pathological complete response (pCR) (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.23 to 1.04; I 2 = 0.0%) and breast-conserving surgery (BCS) (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.23 to 1.04; I 2 = 0.0%). The combined paradigm of NCET presented no significant improvement compared with monotherapy of NET or NCT. Overall, both NET and NCT are effective neoadjuvant treatment options for patients with ER+ breast cancer. More explicit clinical decision indicators need to be further clarified. And NCET does not offer additional benefits over NET or NCT in patients with ER+ breast cancer.

Oncologic Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Surgery in a Colombian Cancer Center: An Observational, Analytical, Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is one of the major surgical advances in breast cancer treatment. This study evaluated the oncological outcomes of BCS in patients with non-metastatic breast cancer at a referral cancer center in a medium-resource country between 2013 and 2019. Methods: An observational, analytical, retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with stage I-IIIC breast cancer treated at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología (Bogotá, Colombia) from September 2013 to March 2019. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, treatment types, and survival outcomes were retrospectively collected. Results: A total of 409 patients were included. In 64.1% of cases, BCS was performed as the initial treatment and in 35.9%, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). With a median follow-up of 85.2 months, tumor recurrence was documented in 9.04% of patients, local recurrence in 2.9%, regional in 2.2%, and distant in 5.6%. The identified risk factors for mortality were a locally advanced clinical stage (HR 5.13; p = 0.01), triple-negative subtype (HR 8.02; p < 0.01), and nodal involvement of more than four lymph nodes in the surgical specimen (HR 4.00; p < 0.01). Conclusions: Breast-conserving surgery is an oncologically safe procedure for patients with early and locally advanced breast cancer who respond to NACT. The time to recurrence and overall survival are determined by the clinical stage, axillary tumor burden, and biological subtype of the disease.

Evaluating the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on surgical outcomes in breast cancer patients: a systematic review study

As a systematic review, this study addresses a gap in the literature by evaluating both the short-term and long-term outcomes of breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The purpose of the current study was to evaluate NAC's impact on breast cancer patients' surgical outcomes. We performed a comprehensive search of international databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Science Direct, covering studies from 2000 to 2023, using carefully selected keywords. Our search strategy aimed to capture a wide variety of relevant studies. To ensure a structured and unbiased selection, we followed PRISMA guidelines throughout the process. We concentrated on identifying studies that reported on short-term outcomes, like surgical complications (e.g., operation time, blood loss), as well as long-term outcomes, including overall survival, tumor size reduction, metastasis rates, breast conservation surgery, and recurrence rates. The findings highlighted the benefits of NAC in terms of lower recurrence and metastasis rates. The results also emphasized the significance of considering tumor characteristics and nodal involvement for prognostication in this patient population. The findings of this study will contribute to a better understanding of the impact of NAC on surgical outcomes in breast cancer patients, providing valuable insights for treatment planning and optimizing patient care.

Avoiding breast cancer surgery in a select cohort of complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: The long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Lately, there has been a resurgence of interest in de-escalation of breast surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Advanced cytotoxic & targeted therapies have improved tumour response.This study evaluates long-term outcomes of post-NAC breast cancer patients, in relation to their surgical management dictated by the NAC response.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Post-NAC breast cancer patients from January 2000 to December 2010 were divided into "No surgery", "WLE" and "Mastectomy" groups. ANOVA and Kaplan-Meier statistical analyses were used to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) in these groups.

RESULTS

This retrospective study included 121 patients with a long median follow-up of 11.5 years. At 10 years the OS was 66.10% and DFS was 59.82%. Complete NAC-responders did not undergo breast surgery but received radiotherapy. Patients were divided into No surgery (n = 28), WLE (n = 44), Mastectomy (n = 49) groups.Comparisons of OS and DFS between groups showed statistically significant differences (p = 0.0003, p = 0.0007 respectively). The no surgery group showed low local recurrence (7.14%).

CONCLUSION

The observed slightly better long-term outcomes with low local recurrences in complete NAC-responders who did not undergo breast surgery but received radiotherapy could be linked to cautious response assessment and meticulous patient selection with early, biologically favourable breast cancer.Importance of PCR assessment cannot be underestimated if breast surgery were to be de-escalated or even omitted in complete NAC-responders.Considering the study limitations, avoiding surgery in all complete NAC-responders may still not be the preferred option. Future appropriate clinical trials with well-defined protocols may pave the way forward.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer: When, why and what?

Indication for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in HR+/HER2-negative tumors is controversial. Pathological complete response (pCR) rates range from 0 to 18 % while breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is achievable in up to 60 % of tumors. No pathological feature definitely predicts pCR; lobular and molecular luminal A tumors are less likely to achieve pCR although experiencing better outcomes. Luminal B subtype, high proliferation, lack of progesterone receptor, high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are positively associated with increased pCR rates but worse outcomes and the prognostic role of pCR is inconsistent across studies. Molecular intrinsic subtyping and genomic signatures appear as more accurate predictors of benefit from NACT, but larger studies are needed. Anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy remains the standard NACT; however, CDK 4/6 inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors are under evaluation. In conclusion, NACT may be proposed for luminal tumors requiring downsizing for BCS after multidisciplinary evaluation, provided that other contraindications to BCS are excluded.

The effect of omission of adjuvant radiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and breast conserving surgery with a pathologic complete response

OBJECTIVE(S)

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a standard of care for locally advanced breast cancers. Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after NAC is an area of active research. We hypothesize overall survival (OS) is not altered by omitting RT in women with a pathologic complete response (pCR) to NAC after breast conserving survery (BCS).

METHODS

Patients from the National Cancer Database who underwent NAC, BCS, and had a pCR were included. Inflammatory disease, <6 months follow up, and unknown variables were excluded. Descriptive statistics characterized the retained cohort. Logistic regression analyzed the influence of variables on the rate of RT omission. Cox proportional hazard modeling analyzed the influence of prognostic variables on OS.

RESULTS

Of 5383 women included, 364 (7%) omitted RT. 5-year OS was 94.1% with RT, 93% without. RT omission was most likely in women >70yo (adjusted OR2.4, 95%CI 1.58-3.65, p < .0001;reference 40-49 yo), Hispanic (AOR 1.73, 95%CI 1.19-2.52, p = .0044; reference non-Hispanic), ≥20 miles from treatment facility (20-49 miles; AOR 1.45, 95%CI 1.09-1.93, p = .0109: >50 miles; AOR 2.02, 95%CI 1.42-2.87, p < .0001;reference 0-19 miles), grade 1 (AOR 4.29, 95%CI 2.16-8.51, p < .0001; reference grade 3), and clinical T4 disease (AOR 3.17, 95%CI 1.74-5.79, p = .0002; reference T0/1). Women ≥60yo (60-69: AHR 2.33, 95%CI 1.41-3.83, p = .0009:70+:AHR 2.4, 95%CI 1.24-4.62, p = .0092; reference 40-49) and with N1 and N3 disease (N1: AHR 1.67, 95% CI 2.28-3.24, p = .0034; N3: AHR3.37,95%CI2.01-5.65,p < .0001) showed increased death. Triple-positive (AHR 0.18, 95%CI 0.07-0.43, p = .0002) and HER2+ patients (AHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.30-0.64, p < .0001) had improved OS compared to triple-negative disease. No survival difference was seen with omission of RT (log-rank test: p = .1783; Cox model AHR 1.33, 95%CI 0.76-2.31, p = .3181).

CONCLUSION

Women ≥70, of Hispanic origin, living ≥20 miles from treatment facility, and grade 1 disease were more likely to omit RT. HER2+ patients had favorable OS, while older age and N3 disease were negative prognostic factors. Omitting RT after a pCR to NAC and BCS was not found to affect OS.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in pre-menopausal patients with oestrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative, lymph node-positive breast cancer

Introduction

Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) has demonstrated efficacy in post-menopausal patients with hormone-responsive breast cancer. This trial was designed to compare the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) with NET in pre-menopausal breast cancer.

Patients and methods

In this prospective, randomised, phase III study, oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative, and lymph node-positive pre-menopausal breast cancer patients were recruited from 7 hospitals in South Korea. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 24 weeks of either NCT or NET with goserelin and tamoxifen. The primary purpose was to evaluate the non-inferiority of NET compared to NCT using clinical response, assessed by MRI. Besides, pathological complete response rate (pCR), changes in Ki-67 expression, breast conservation surgery (BCS) rate, and quality of life were included as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 187 patients were assigned to receive NCT (n = 95) or NET (n = 92), and 87 patients in each group completed treatments. More NCT patients had complete response or partial response than NET patients using MRI (NCT 83.7% vs. NET 52.9%, 95% CI 17.6–44.0, p < 0.001) and callipers (NCT 83.9% vs. NET 71.3%, 95% CI 0.4–24.9, p = 0.046). Three NCT patients (3.4%) and one NET patient (1.2%) showed pCR (p < 0.005). No difference existed in the conversion rate of BCS (13.8% for NCT vs. 11.5% for NET, p = 0.531) and Ki-67 change (p = 0.114) between the two groups. Nineteen NCT patients had treatment-related grade 3 or worse events compared with none in the NET group.

Conclusions

Better clinical responses were observed in pre-menopausal patients after 24 weeks of NCT compared to those observed after NET.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01622361. Registration June 19, 2012.