Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Recurrence and survival among breast cancer patients achieving a pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patients who achieve a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy, including chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab (NAT) have better outcomes than patients with residual disease. Despite the excellent prognosis associated with achieving a pCR, tumors still recur. The objective of this study was to evaluate factors associated with tumor recurrence and survival among patients achieving pCR after NAT. We identified 749 patients with primary breast cancer who achieved pCR after NAT between 1988 and 2009. pCR was defined as no evidence of invasive cancer in the breast and ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes on pathological evaluation. The Kaplan–Meier product limit method and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between clinical and demographic factors and outcomes. Median follow-up was 35 months (range, 1–258 months). Overall 5-year distant metastasis-free survival was 93 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 90–95 %) and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 96 % (95 % CI, 93–97 %). In the multivariable model, we observed that patients >50 years had significantly decreased risk of distant metastasis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.47; 95 % CI, 0.22–0.98) and that patients with clinical stage at diagnosis IIIB–C cancer had both an increased risk of distant metastasis (HR 3.92; 95 % CI, 1.54–10.00) and lower OS (HR 4.75; 95 % CI, 1.60–14.08). Patients with pCR after NAT have excellent outcomes. However, our data show that younger patient and those with clinical stage at diagnosis IIIB and IIIC cancers are at increased risk of developing distant metastasis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chia S, Swain SM, Byrd DR, Mankoff DA (2008) Locally advanced and inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:786–790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu SV, Melstrom L, Yao K et al (2010) Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 101:283–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berruti A, Brizzi MP, Generali D et al (2008) Presurgical systemic treatment of nonmetastatic breast cancer: facts and open questions. Oncologist 13:1137–1148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Bear HD et al (2007) Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: new perspectives 2006. Ann Oncol 18:1927–1934

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mieog JS, van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ (2007) Preoperative chemotherapy for women with operable breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Cd005002

  6. Teshome M, Hunt KK (2014) Neoadjuvant therapy in the treatment of breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 23:505–523

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Prowell TM, Pazdur R (2012) Pathological complete response and accelerated drug approval in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 366:2438–2441

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD et al (2008) Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 26:778–785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M et al (2014) Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 384:164–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bonnefoi H, Litiere S, Piccart M et al (2014) 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 25:1128–1136

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mieog JS, van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ (2007) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Br J Surg 94:1189–1200

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N et al (1998) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2672–2685

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuerer HM, Newman LA, Smith TL et al (1999) Clinical course of breast cancer patients with complete pathologic primary tumor and axillary lymph node response to doxorubicin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 17:460–469

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fei F, Messina C, Slaets L et al (2015) Tumour size is the only predictive factor of distant recurrence after pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with large operable or locally advanced breast cancers: a sub-study of EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 phase III trial. Eur J Cancer 51:301–309

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Nuesch E et al (2011) Impact of treatment characteristics on response of different breast cancer phenotypes: pooled analysis of the German neo-adjuvant chemotherapy trials. Breast Cancer Res Treat 125:145–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU et al (2012) Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 30:1796–1804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bear HD, Anderson S, Brown A et al (2003) The effect on tumor response of adding sequential preoperative docetaxel to preoperative doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: preliminary results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 21:4165–4174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Feldman LD, Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU et al (1986) Pathological assessment of response to induction chemotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer Res 46:2578–2581

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tubiana-Hulin M, Stevens D, Lasry S et al (2006) Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in lobular and ductal breast carcinomas: a retrospective study on 860 patients from one institution. Ann Oncol 17:1228–1233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Luangdilok S, Samarnthai N, Korphaisarn K (2014) Association between pathological complete response and outcome following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer patients. J Breast Cancer 17:376–385

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wu K, Yang Q, Liu Y et al (2014) Meta-analysis on the association between pathologic complete response and triple-negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. World J Surg Oncol 12:95

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tan MC, Al Mushawah F, Gao F et al (2009) Predictors of complete pathological response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer. Am J Surg 198:520–525

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tanioka M, Shimizu C, Yonemori K et al (2010) Predictors of recurrence in breast cancer patients with a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 103:297–302

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, McGuire SE, Buchholz TA et al (2005) Factors predictive of distant metastases in patients with breast cancer who have a pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 23:7098–7104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gianni L, Eiermann W, Semiglazov V et al (2014) Neoadjuvant and adjuvant trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer (NOAH): follow-up of a randomised controlled superiority trial with a parallel HER2-negative cohort. Lancet Oncol 15:640–647

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Guarneri V, Broglio K, Kau SW et al (2006) Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after primary chemotherapy in relation to hormone receptor status and other factors. J Clin Oncol 24:1037–1044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ring AE, Smith IE, Ashley S et al (2004) Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br J Cancer 91:2012–2017

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jeruss JS, Mittendorf EA, Tucker SL et al (2008) Combined use of clinical and pathologic staging variables to define outcomes for breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol 26:246–252

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Mittendorf EA, Jeruss JS, Tucker SL et al (2011) Validation of a novel staging system for disease-specific survival in patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 29:1956–1962

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler Street, Unit 1444, Houston, TX, USA

    Misbat Chaudry, Ana M. Gonzalez-Angulo, Vicente Valero, Debu Tripathy, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi & Mariana Chavez-MacGregor

  2. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Xiudong Lei & Mariana Chavez-MacGregor

  3. Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Elizabeth A. Mittendorf

Authors
  1. Misbat Chaudry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiudong Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ana M. Gonzalez-Angulo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth A. Mittendorf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vicente Valero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Debu Tripathy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mariana Chavez-MacGregor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariana Chavez-MacGregor.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chaudry, M., Lei, X., Gonzalez-Angulo, A.M. et al. Recurrence and survival among breast cancer patients achieving a pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 153, 417–423 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3533-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3533-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation