[Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients with operable primary breast cancer: more benefits than breast-conserving therapy].

Abstract

RESULTS

In patients with ductal carcinoma and lobular carcinoma an increase in breast-conserving therapy was seen in 32% and 17% of patients respectively. The pCR rate was 12% and 2% respectively. Secondary mastectomy because of irradical resection was required in 3% and 50% respectively. Multivariate analysis indicated that molecular type, defined on the basis of the expression of hormone receptors and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), i.e. luminal (oestrogen receptor-positive), basal (hormone receptor-negative and HER2-negative) and HER2-positive tumours treated with trastuzumab was the only independent predictor of pCR; 2%, 28% and 35% respectively (p=0.004). In 43 patients the chemotherapy regimen was adjusted because the tumour did not respond sufficiently. A favourable clinical response was observed in 72% (31/43) of these patients.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the extent to which primary systemic therapy (PST) achieves the main goals in patients with operable primary breast cancer, these goals being breast-conserving therapy and pathological complete remission (pCR), and to evaluate the response.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

METHOD

In a retrospective analysis of 254 patients treated with PST in 2000-2007 in the Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, patients with inoperable disease (T4 and/or N3) were excluded. The response was mostly evaluated using contrast-enhanced MRI, whereby the chemotherapy regimen was switched if the reduction in the largest diameter of contrast washout was less than 25%. pCR was defined as no evidence of invasive cancer in the breast and axilla in the resection specimen.

CONCLUSION

The observed increase in the number of breast-conserving therapies after PST was clinically relevant. PST may be more effective when contrast-enhanced MRI is used for interim evaluation, based on which the treatment may be switched. There was a clear difference in histological and molecular types of tumour and therefore the choice of treatment may be adjusted accordingly.