Outcome after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in estrogen receptor-positive and progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer patients: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from ten prospectively randomized controlled neoadjuvant trials
- 585 Downloads
The estrogen receptor (ER) is involved in control of progesterone receptor (PgR) expression and lack of PgR may be also a surrogate of altered growth factor signaling. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate PgR expression as predictive factor for response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term outcome.
Five thousand and six hundred and thirteen patients with primary breast cancer and positive ER expression from ten German neoadjuvant trials of anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy were included. Pathologic complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), overall survival (OS), and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were compared according to PgR expression.
The lack of PgR expression (1172 patients) was associated with grade 3 (38.4 vs. 26.3%; p < 0.001), nodal involvement (>cN2) (6.8% vs. 4.7%; p = 0.004), and HER2 positivity (36.2 vs. 22.3%; p < 0.001). pCR rates of PgR-negative tumors were higher in the entire cohort (13.8 vs. 7.5%; p < 0.001) and in the HER2-negative subgroup (11.2 vs. 5.8%; p < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression, PgR negativity was an independent predictive factor for pCR overall (OR 1.76; p < 0.001) and in the HER2-negative patients (OR 1.99; p < 0.001). Patients with PgR-negative disease had significantly worse outcome (p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that PgR was an independent prognostic factor for DFS, OS, DDFS, and LRFS.
ER-positive/PgR-negative breast carcinomas are associated with higher response but also worse long-term outcome after neoadjuvant therapy. PgR negativity is an independent predictive factor for pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer.
KeywordsBreast cancer Progesterone receptor Neoadjuvant chemotherapy Outcome
We would like to thank all patients, investigators, and study personnel who supported the trials and the German Breast Group for support.
This study was supported by a Grant from the German Cancer Aid (Translational Oncology project 111536, TransLuminal-B).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Peter Fasching is a consultant for Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche and receives funding from Novartis. Claus Hanusch is a consultant for Roche, Pfizer Amgen, Asrazeneca, Celgene, and Novartis. Sherko Kuemmel is a consultant for Roche, Amgen, Novartis, Genomic Health, Cellgene, Tewa, and Dairdi-Saulay and receives funding from Roche. Frederik Marme acts as a consultant for Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, and Genomic Health and receives remuneration from the aforementioned companies. All remaining authors declare that there exists no conflict of interest.
- 3.Dutertre M, Smith CL (2003) Ligand-independent interactions of p160/steroid receptor coactivators and CREB-binding protein (CBP) with estrogen receptor-alpha: regulation by phosphorylation sites in the A/B region depends on other receptor domains. Mol Endocrinol 17:1296–1314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bardou VJ, Arpino G, Elledge RM, Osborne CK, Clark GM (2003) Progesterone receptor status significantly improves outcome prediction over estrogen receptor status alone for adjuvant endocrine therapy in two large breast cancer databases. J Clin Oncol 21:1973–1979. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.09.099 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dowsett M, Allred C, Knox J, Quinn E, Salter J, Wale C et al (2008) Relationship between quantitative estrogen and progesterone receptor expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status with recurrence in the arimidex, tamoxifen, alone or in combination trial. J Clin Oncol 26:1059–1065. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.9437 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Viale G, Regan MM, Maiorano E, Mastropasqua MG, Golouh R, Perin T et al (2008) Chemoendocrine compared with endocrine adjuvant therapies for node-negative breast cancer: predictive value of centrally reviewed expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors–International Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 26:1404–1410. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.10.6393 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.von Minckwitz G, Costa SD, Raab G, Blohmer JU, Eidtmann H, Hilfrich J et al (2001) Dose-dense doxorubicin, docetaxel, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support with or without tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in patients with operable carcinoma of the breast: a randomized, controlled, open phase IIb study. J Clin Oncol 19:3506–3515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A, Schutte M, Hilfrich J, Blohmer JU et al (2005) Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: the GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 23:2676–2685. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, Vogel P, Hanusch C, Eidtmann H, Hilfrich J et al (2008) Neoadjuvant vinorelbine-capecitabine versus docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide in early nonresponsive breast cancer: phase III randomized GeparTrio trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:542–551. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Untch M, Fasching PA, Konecny GE, von Koch F, Conrad U, Fett W et al (2011) PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative, dose-dense, dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel ± darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer–results at the time of surgery. Ann Oncol 22:1988–1998. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq709 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Untch M, von Minckwitz G, Konecny GE, Conrad U, Fett W, Kurzeder C et al (2011) PREPARE trial: a randomized phase III trial comparing preoperative, dose-dense, dose-intensified chemotherapy with epirubicin, paclitaxel, and CMF versus a standard-dosed epirubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel with or without darbepoetin alfa in primary breast cancer–outcome on prognosis. Ann Oncol 22:1999–2006. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq713 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Untch M, Fasching PA, Konecny GE, Hasmuller S, Lebeau A, Kreienberg R et al (2011) Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab predicts favorable survival in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-overexpressing breast cancer: results from the TECHNO trial of the AGO and GBG study groups. J Clin Oncol 29:3351–3357. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.4930 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Nuesch E, Loibl S, Kaufmann M, Kummel S 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. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-1228-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Untch M, Loibl S, Bischoff J, Eidtmann H, Kaufmann M, Blohmer JU et al (2012) Lapatinib versus trastuzumab in combination with neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane-based chemotherapy (GeparQuinto, GBG 44): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 13:135–144. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70397-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.von Minckwitz G, Schneeweiss A, Loibl S, Salat C, Denkert C, Rezai M et al (2014) Neoadjuvant carboplatin in patients with triple-negative and HER2-positive early breast cancer (GeparSixto; GBG 66): a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 15:747–756. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70160-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, Costa SD, Eidtmann H, Fasching PA 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. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.8595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative G, Davies C, Godwin J, Gray R, Clarke M, Cutter D et al (2011) Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 378:771–784. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60993-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Dowsett M, Houghton J, Iden C, Salter J, Farndon J, A’Hern R et al (2006) Benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in primary breast cancer patients according oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, EGF receptor and HER2 status. Ann Oncol 17:818–826. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdl016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Viale G, Regan MM, Dell’Orto P, Mastropasqua MG, Maiorano E, Rasmussen BB et al (2011) Which patients benefit most from adjuvant aromatase inhibitors? Results using a composite measure of prognostic risk in the BIG 1-98 randomized trial. Ann Oncol 22:2201–2207. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq738 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 36.Arpino G, Weiss H, Lee AV, Schiff R, De Placido S, Osborne CK et al (2005) Estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer: association with growth factor receptor expression and tamoxifen resistance. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:1254–1261. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji249 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar