Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2020; 09(03): 136-140
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721238
Original Article: Breast Cancer

Pathological Complete Response in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Survival Outcome and Its Relevance as a Surrogate End Point

Reshu Agarwal
1   Department of Breast and Gynecology Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
U. G. Unnikrishnan
2   Biostatistics, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Pavithran Keechilat
3   Medical Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Anupama Rajanbabu
1   Department of Breast and Gynecology Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Wesley Jose
3   Medical Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
D. K. Vijaykumar
1   Department of Breast and Gynecology Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
› Author Affiliations Funding Nil.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy has emerged as a reliable surrogate marker for improved survival in breast cancer (BC), but its role as a surrogate end point is still controversial.

Aims and Objectives The aim of the study is to investigate the clinical course of BC patients with pCR and to evaluate the relevance of pCR as a surrogate end point for survival.

Materials and Methods This was a single-institution retrospective analysis done at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences. Records of BC patients from 2004 to 2014 were analyzed. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared using the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test, respectively. pCR and survival association were evaluated using regression analysis (R 2).

Results Of 224 patients included in the study pCR rate was 15.2%. The median duration of follow-up was 61 months (range: 3–151 months). DFS (73.4 vs. 46.1%, p = 0.032) and OS (82.5 vs. 56.4%, p = 0.022) of pCR cohort was significantly higher than non-pCR cohort. Recurrence rate was significantly lower in the pCR cohort at: All distant sites (p = 0.01 3), visceral sites (p = 0.007), both bone and visceral sites (p = 0.007), and nodal sites (p = 0.007). There was no difference in the bone-only recurrence (p = 0.3 15). Death rate was significantly lower in pCR cohort (p = 0.007). The R2 value for pCR as a surrogate for DFS and OS was 0.006 and 0.004, respectively.

Conclusion pCR is a favorable prognostic factor associated with improved survival. However, there is no association between pCR and survival.

Keywords

locally advanced breast cancer - neoadjuvant chemotherapy - pathological complete response - surrogate end point


Publication History

Article published online:
14 December 2020

© 2020. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97 (03) 188-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V. et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with trastuzumab followed by adjuvant trastuzumab versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (the NOAH trial): a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet 2010; 375 (9712) 377-384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hutcheon AW, Heys SD, Sarkar TK. Aberdeen Breast Group. Neoadjuvant docetaxel in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003; 79 (01) S19-S24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Untch M, Möbus V, Kuhn W. et al. Intensive dose-dense compared with conventionally scheduled preoperative chemotherapy for high-risk primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27 (18) 2938-2945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL. et al. Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17 (02) 460-469
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rouzier R, Extra JM, Klijanienko J. et al. Incidence and prognostic significance of complete axillary downstaging after primary chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with T1 to T3 tumors and cytologically proven axillary metastatic lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20 (05) 1304-1310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A. et al. Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL–CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (26) 3242-3249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP. et al. Recommendations from an international consensus conference on the current status and future of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19 (05) 1508-1516
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M. et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 2014; 384 (9938) 164-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mazouni C, Peintinger F, Wan-Kau S. et al. Residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with complete eradication of invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not adversely affect patient outcome. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25 (19) 2650-2655
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Wolmark N, Wang J, Mamounas E, Bryant J, Fisher B. Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2001; 30 (30) 96-102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N. et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16 (08) 2672-2685
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chollet P, Amat S, Cure H. et al. Prognostic significance of a complete pathological response after induction chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2002; 86 (07) 1041-1046
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Gonzalez-Angulo AM, McGuire SE, Buchholz TA. et al. Factors predictive of distant metastases in patients with breast cancer who have a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (28) 7098-7104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Dawood S, Broglio K, Kau SW. et al. Prognostic value of initial clinical disease stage after achieving pathological complete response. Oncologist 2008; 13 (01) 6-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU. et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (15) 1796-1804
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Bonnefoi H, Litière S, Piccart M. et al. EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 Study investigators. Pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an independent predictive factor irrespective of simplified breast cancer intrinsic subtypes: a landmark and two-step approach analyses from the EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 phase III trial. Ann Oncol 2014; 25 (06) 1128-1136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Fayanju OM, Nwaogu I, Jeffe DB, Margenthaler JA. Pathological complete response in breast cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy at a comprehensive cancer center: the natural history of an elusive prognosticator. Mol Clin Oncol 2015; 3 (04) 775-780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Berruti A, Amoroso V, Gallo F. et al. Pathologic complete response as a potential surrogate for the clinical outcome in patients with breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-regression of 29 randomized prospective studies. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32 (34) 3883-3891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Piccart-Gebhart M, Holmes E, Baselga J. et al. Adjuvant lapatinib and trastuzumab for early human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III adjuvant lapatinib and/or trastuzumab treatment optimization trial. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34 (10) 1034-1042
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rose BS, Winer EP, Mamon HJ. Perils of the pathologic complete response. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34 (33) 3959-3962
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar