Effiacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different subtypes of breast cancer and factors influencing prognosis

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0785.2021.10.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the curative effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different subtype of breast cancer and the influencing factors of prognosis.

Methods

The clinicopathologic data and pathological complete response (pCR) rate in 95 patients with breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy at Peking University Shenzhen Hospital were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Follow-up was conducted in January 2021 to analyze the factors affecting pCR and prognosis.

Results

Among the 95 patients, 18 (18.9%) had a pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The distribution of pathological response across four subtypes was significantly different (P＜0.05). Univariate analysis showed that the expression of estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor and the subtype of breast cancer were correlated with pCR (P＜0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that the pCR rate in Luminal B human epidermal growth factor receptor 2(HER2) negative breast cancer was lower than that in triple negative breast cancer (P＜0.05). There was no difference in disease free survival among different subtypes of breast cancer (P＞0.05).

Conclusion

The selection of neoadjuvant chemotherapy should consider clinicopathological characteristics and the subtype of breast cancer.

Key words: Breast neoplasms, Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, Subtype, Prognosis

Qiaoli Guo, Qingzhi Song, Hui Hu. Effiacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for different subtypes of breast cancer and factors influencing prognosis[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(10): 754-759.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhlcyszz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0785.2021.10.007

https://zhlcyszz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2021/V15/I10/754

Figures/Tables 6

References 21

1	International Agency for Research on Cancer. Global cancer observatory: cancer today [EB/OL]. [2021-01-11]. URL
2	中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会. 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范(2019版) [J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2019, 29(8): 609-680.
3	Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2002 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2005, 55(2): 74-108.
4	Trudeau M, Sinclair SE, Clemons M, et al. Neoadjuvant taxanes in the treatment of non-metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review [J]. Cancer Treat Rev, 2005, 31(4): 283-302.
5	Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Wolff AC, et al. American society of clinical oncology/college of American pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer [J]. J Oncol Pract, 2010, 6(4): 195-197.
6	Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update [J]. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2014, 138(2): 241-256.
7	Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2013 [J]. Ann Oncol, 2013, 24(9): 2206-2223.
8	Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: The CTNeoBC pooled analysis [J]. Lancet, 2014, 384(9938): 164-172.
9	Kinsella MD, Nassar A, Siddiqui MT, et al. Estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER-2 expression pre- and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast carcinoma: a single institutional experience [J]. Int J Clin Exp Pathol, 2012, 5(6): 530-536.
10	Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis [J]. Lancet, 2014, 384(9938): 164-172.
11	Early Breast Cancer Trialists′ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2018, 19(1): 27-39.
12	DeMichele A, Yee D, Esserman L. Mechanisms of resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer [J]. N Engl J Med, 2017, 377(23): 2287-2289.
13	Rossi L, Verrico M, Tomao S, et al. Expression of ER, PgR, HER-2, and Ki-67 in core biopsies and in definitive histological specimens in patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy [J]. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 2020, 85(1): 105-111.
14	Chou HH, Kuo WL, Yu CC, et al. Impact of age on pathological complete response and locoregional recurrence in locally advanced breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [J]. Biomed J, 2019, 42(1): 66-74.
15	Haque W, Verma V, Hatch S, et al. Response rates and pathologic complete response by breast cancer molecular subtype following neoadjuvant chemotherapy [J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2018, 170(3): 559-567.
16	Derks M, Van D. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: more than just downsizing [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2018, 19(1): 2-3.
17	Chaudhary LN, Wilkinson KH, Kong A. Triple-negative breast cancer: who should receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy? [J]. Surg Oncol Clin N Am, 2018, 27(1): 141-153.
18	Masuda N, Lee SJ, Ohtani S, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy [J]. N Engl J Med, 2017, 376(22): 2147-2159.
19	Wang X, Wang SS, Huang H, et al. Effect of capecitabine maintenance therapy using lower dosage and higher frequency vs observation on disease-free survival among patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer who had received standard treatment: The SYSUCC-001 Randomized Clinical Trial [J]. JAMA, 2021, 325(1): 50-58.
20	Conte P, Schneeweiss A,Loibl S, et al. Patient-reported outcomes from KATHERINE: A phase 3 study of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine versus trastuzumab in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer [J]. Cancer, 2020, 126(13): 3132-3139.
21	Laas E, Labrosse J, Hamy AS, et al. Determination of breast cancer prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: comparison of Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) and Neo-Bioscore [J]. Br J Cancer, 2021, 124(8): 1421-1427.

分子分型	例数	Miller-Payne分级
分子分型	例数	G1	G2	G3	G4	G5
HER2阳性型	12	1	1	1	4	5
三阴型	16	2	3	1	4	6
Luminal B HER2阳性型	28	2	5	10	8	3
Luminal B HER2阴性型	39	8	10	15	2	4

分子分型	例数	Miller-Payne分级
分子分型	例数	G1	G2	G3	G4	G5
HER2阳性型	12	1	1	1	4	5
三阴型	16	2	3	1	4	6
Luminal B HER2阳性型	28	2	5	10	8	3
Luminal B HER2阴性型	39	8	10	15	2	4

临床病理特征	例数	Miller-Payne分级			χ²值	P值
临床病理特征	例数	G1	G2~G4	G5	χ²值	P值
是否绝经					1.783	0.410
否	74	10	48	16
是	21	3	16	2
TNM分期					1.852	0.763
Ⅰ期	2	0	2	0
Ⅱ期	52	7	34	11
Ⅲ期	41	6	28	7
ER					9.873	0.007
阴性	30	5	14	11
阳性	65	8	50	7
PR					9.694	0.008
阴性	33	3	18	12
阳性	62	10	46	6
HER2					0.347	0.830
阴性	54	8	35	11
阳性	41	5	29	7
Ki67					2.614	0.271
＞14%	6	1	5	0
≤14%	89	12	59	18
分子分型					13.385	0.037
HER2阳性型	12	1	6	5
Luminal B HER2阳性型	28	2	23	3
Luminal B HER2阴性型	39	8	27	4
三阴型	16	2	8	6

临床病理特征	例数	Miller-Payne分级			χ²值	P值
临床病理特征	例数	G1	G2~G4	G5	χ²值	P值
是否绝经					1.783	0.410
否	74	10	48	16
是	21	3	16	2
TNM分期					1.852	0.763
Ⅰ期	2	0	2	0
Ⅱ期	52	7	34	11
Ⅲ期	41	6	28	7
ER					9.873	0.007
阴性	30	5	14	11
阳性	65	8	50	7
PR					9.694	0.008
阴性	33	3	18	12
阳性	62	10	46	6
HER2					0.347	0.830
阴性	54	8	35	11
阳性	41	5	29	7
Ki67					2.614	0.271
＞14%	6	1	5	0
≤14%	89	12	59	18
分子分型					13.385	0.037
HER2阳性型	12	1	6	5
Luminal B HER2阳性型	28	2	23	3
Luminal B HER2阴性型	39	8	27	4
三阴型	16	2	8	6

因素	β	SE	Wald	P值	df	HR值	95%CI
分子分型
三阴型	-	-	-	-	0	-	-
HER2阳性型	0.071	0.779	0.008	0.928	1	1.074	-1.455~1.597
Luminal B HER2阳性型	-1.972	1.257	2.462	0.117	1	0.139	-4.434~0.497
Luminal B HER2阴性型	-2.467	1.243	3.936	0.047	1	0.085	-4.904~-0.03
ER
阳性	-	-	-	-	0	-	-
阴性	-2.008	1.124	3.19	0.074	1	0.134	-4.211~0.195
PR
阳性	-	-	-	-	0	-	-
阴性	1.263	0.772	3.062	0.08	1	3.356	-0.152~2.677

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export