Advertisement

Utilization, duration, and outcomes of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in the United States

  • Ashley C. Pariser
  • Tannaz Sedghi
  • Pamela R. Soulos
  • Brigid Killelea
  • Cary P. Gross
  • Sarah S. MougalianEmail author
Epidemiology

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate if real-world utilization of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) is associated with similar rates of response and breast conservation surgery (BCS) compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

Methods

Our population-based assessment used the National Cancer Data Base to identify women diagnosed with stage II–III, hormone receptor (HR)-positive BC who underwent surgery and received endocrine therapy from 2004 to 2014. Women were categorized by receipt of NET, NAC or no neoadjuvant therapy. We used logistic regression to assess differences in outcomes between therapies using inverse propensity score weighting to adjust for potential selection bias.

Results

In our sample of 211,986 women, 6584 received NET, 52,310 received NAC, and 153,092 did not receive any neoadjuvant therapy. After adjusting for multiple relevant covariates and cofounders, there was no significant difference between NET and NAC with regard to BCS [odds ratio (OR) 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.82–1.01)]; however, women who received NET were significantly less likely to achieve pCR [OR 0.34; 95% CI (0.23–0.51)] or a decrease in T stage [OR 0.39; CI (0.34–0.44)] compared to women treated with NAC. Patients who received NET for ≥ 3 months had higher odds of BCS (OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.46–1.73) and downstaging (OR 1.79; 95% CI 1.63–1.97) compared to patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy.

Conclusions

Women who received NET had similar rates of BCS compared to women who received NAC. Those who received NET for longer treatment durations had increased odds of BCS and downstaging compared to women who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy.

Keywords

Neoadjuvant endocrine therapy Neoadjuvant chemotherapy Breast conservation therapy Hormone positive breast cancer 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure

Pamela R. Soulos: 21st Century Oncology

Dr. Killelea: Advisory Board Member (2017), Genentech 2017 Advisory Board

Dr. Gross: Research Grants from Pfizer (PI) and Johnson & Johnson (Co-PI), as well as Genentech

Dr. Mougalian: Consulting (Eisai, Puma Biotechnology, Celgene); Research Grants from Pfizer and Genentech

Dr. Pariser: No disclosures

Ms. Sedghi: No disclosures

Ms. Soulos: Research Funding from 21st Century Oncology

References

  1. 1.
    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 16:2672–2685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hd B (2010) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer: individualizing locoregional and systemic therapy. Surg Oncol Clin 19:607–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E et al (1997) Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 15:2483–2493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eiermann W, Paepke S, Appfelstaedt J et al (2001) Preoperative treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer patients with letrozole: a randomized double-blind multicenter study. Ann Oncol 12:1527–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellis M (2011) Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype -ACOSOG Z1031. J Clin Oncol 29:2342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    EBCTC Group (2012) Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet 379:432–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith IEDM, Ebbs SR (2005) Neoadjuvant treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer with anastrozole, tamoxifen, or both in combination: the Immediate Preoperative Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, or Combined with Tamoxifen (IMPACT) multicenter double-blind randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 23:5108–5116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alba ECL, Albanell J (2012) Chemotherapy (CT) and hormonotherapy (HT) as neoadjuvant treatment in luminal breast cancer patients: results from the GEICAM/2006-03, a multicenter, randomized, phase-II study. Ann Oncol 23:3069–3074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fontein DB et al (2014) Efficacy of six month neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients -a phase II trial. Eur J Cancer 50:2190–2200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP et al (2012) Recommendations from an international consensus conference on the current status and future of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 19:1508–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Semiglazov VF, Semiglazov VV, Dashyan GA et al (2007) Phase 2 randomized trial of primary endocrine therapy versus chemotherapy in postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Cancer 110:244–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cataliotti LBA, Noguchi S (2006) Comparison of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the Pre-Operative “Arimidex” Compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) trial. Cancer 106:2095–2103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Colleoni M et al (2004) Chemotherapy is more effective in patients with breast cancer not expressing steroid hormone receptors: a study of preoperative treatment. Clin Cancer Res 10:6622–6628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Masuda N, Sagara Y, Kinoshita T et al (2012) Neoadjuvant anastrozole versus tamoxifen in patients receiving goserelin for premenopausal breast cancer (STAGE): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 13:345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lm S (2016) Neoadjuvant therapy for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 2:1477–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carpenter R, Doughty JC, Cordiner C et al (2014) Optimum duration of neoadjuvant letrozole to permit breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 144:569–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dixon JM, Renshaw L, Macaskill EJ et al (2009) Increase in response rate by prolonged treatment with neoadjuvant letrozole. Breast Cancer Res Treat 113:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krainick-Strobel UELW, Wallwiener D (2008) Neoadjuvant letrozole in postmenopausal estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive breast cancer: a phase IIb/III trial to investigate optimal duration of preoperative endocrine therapy. BMC Cancer 8:62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chiba AHT, Heins CN (2017) Trends in neoadjuvant endocrine therapy use and impact on rates of breast conservation in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a national cancer data base study. Ann Surg Oncol 24:418–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Austin PC (2009) Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 28:3083–3107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Normand SLT, Landrum MB, Guadagnoli E et al (2001) Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores. J Clin Epidemiol 54:387–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weitzen S, Lapane KL, Toledano AY et al (2004) Principles for modeling propensity scores in medical research: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 13:841–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cortazar PZL, Untch M (2014) Pathologic complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet 384:164–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burstein HJ, Lacchetti C, Anderson H et al (2019) Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol 37:423–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess KR et al (2008) Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:1275–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ellis MJ, Tao Y, Luo J et al (2008) Outcome prediction for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer based on postneoadjuvant endocrine therapy tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1380–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Suman VJ, Ellis MJ, Ma CX (2015) The ALTERNATE trial: assessing a biomarker driven strategy for the treatment of post-menopausal women with ER+/Her2− invasive breast cancer. Chin Clin Oncol 4:34Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Allevi G, Strina C, Andreis D et al (2013) Increased pathological complete response rate after a long-term neoadjuvant letrozole treatment in postmenopausal oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer. Br J Cancer 108:1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Yale Cancer CenterYale New Haven HospitalNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Yale COPPERNew HavenUSA
  3. 3.Department of Internal MedicineYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  5. 5.Medical OncologyYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations